HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30698 of 2025 Court No. - 66 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed by the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Shamsher Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Chandra Prakash Singh, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Ajay Kumar Kushwaha, learned counsel for informant and Sri Ashutosh Singh, learned AGA for the State. 3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 338 of 2024, under Sections 105, 351(2), 351(3), 352 BNS and Section 3/25/2 Arms Act, Police Station Haldaur, District Bijnor during pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however, this is second bail application filed on behalf of applicant and first bail application of the applicant was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 07.04.2025 which has been annexed at page-15 of the paper-book but applicant is in jail in the present matter since 21.12.2024 i.e. for last more than 15 months and till date only one prosecution witness could be examined i.e. informant of the case however in the charge-sheet there are total 14 witnesses, therefore, there is no hope of early disposal of trial. 5. He further submits, applicant is facing trial for offence under Section 105 BNS along with other sections. He further submits, there is no evidence which can suggests that applicant is causing delay in trial. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abrar Alam, Ajay Kumar Kashyap, Amar Singh Kashyap, P.K. Singh, Shamsher Singh, Sunil Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ajay Kumar Kushwaha, Shad Khan, G.A. Ankit Kashyap .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 6. He further submits, even from the statement of informant recorded before the trial court it reflects, he has changed the place of incident. He further submits, as per FIR and statement of informant recorded during investigation it appears, incident occurred in front of the house of informant but during trial he stated that incident occurred in front of house of Ishwar Chandra @ Monu and this fact suggests that actually informant is not an eye witness. 7. He further submits, admittedly applicant never intended to cause firearm injury to the mother of the informant and as per allegation he opened fire upon the mother of Ishwar Chandra @ Monu which unfortunately hit the mother of the informant. 8. He further submits, however, apart from the present case applicant was also made accused in four other cases but in one case after investigation final report has been submitted and in another case applicant has already been acquitted and proceedings of one case which relates to gambling Act has been culminated and one another case is a complaint case. 9. He further submits, therefore, considering the above facts, applicant should be enlarged on bail. 10. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for informant opposed the prayer for bail and submit, this is second bail application filed on behalf of applicant and after considering the merit of the case his first bail application was dismissed but they could not dispute the fact that during trial informant of the case changed the place of incident. They also could not dispute the other argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for applicant. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 12. However, this is second bail application filed on behalf of applicant and first bail application of the applicant was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 07.04.2025 but it reflects, during trial informant of the case who was also one of the eye witness changed the place of incident. 13. Further, even from the record it reflects, applicant was not having any intention to cause injury to the deceased and it reflects, as per allegation applicant opened fire upon the mother of Ishwar Chandra @ Monu which accidentally hit the deceased. BAIL No. 30698 of 2025 2 14. Further, applicant is facing trial for offence under Section 105 BNS along with other sections and he is detained in jail since 21.12.2024 i.e. for last more than 15 months and till date out of 14 witness of the charge-sheet only one could be examined and it could not be reflected, applicant is responsible for delay in trial. Considering the pace of trial there is no hope of early disposal of trial. 15. Further, however, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of four other cases but in one case after investigation final report has been submitted and in another case applicant has already been acquitted and one case which relates to Gambling Act proceeding has been culminated and one another case is a complaint case. 16. Further, law is settled that unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to be innocent and bail application should not be dismissed either for punitive or preventive purpose. 17. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 18. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 19. Let the applicant - Ankit Kashyap be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 20. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 21. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts BAIL No. 30698 of 2025 3 brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. April 2, 2026 AK Pandey BAIL No. 30698 of 2025 4 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad