HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5757 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. 1. Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record. 3. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.312 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 302, 504, 506, 307, 34 IPC and Section 7 of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, Police Station Mohali, District Sitapur. 4. In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that son of the informant had gone to his agricultural field where the dispute occurred in between the parties. Subsequently, all the accused named in the FIR with common intention came armed with Lathi-Danda etc and caused firearm injury to the son of the informant, which resulted into his death. The causing of firearm injury was attributed to the co-accused Kalamu. The cause of death as per the postmortem report is multiple firearm injury on the chest; upper part of the chest and the neck; on shoulder joint and the firearm wound on the left side of the hand. 5. In the light of the aforesaid, the Counsel for the applicant argues that in terms of the statement of the informant recorded during trial, it was stated that the firearm injuries attributable to the applicant was of the arm and Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pawan Kumar Yadav, Anjali Yadav, Desh Raj Singh Yadav, Santosh Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Mulayam Yadav .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) thus the applicant, who is in custody since 30.06.2022, may be enlarged on bail. The criminal antecedents of the applicant has been duly explained. 6. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail prayer and argues that it was specifically stated that the applicant and the co-accused Kalamu alias Kalam Singh have caused the firearm injuries. He further argues that the bail application of the co-accused Kalamu, who has assigned the role of firearm injury, was denied the benefit of bail vide order dated 27.09.2024. It is further argues that the applicant is not co-operating with the trial and the cross-examination is going on in a tardy manner. 7. Considering the fact that the offence in question was committed by all the accused in broad daylight and multiple firearm injuries were inflicted on the body of the deceased as is evident from the postmortem report and the specific statement on record suggests that the firearm injury attributed to the applicant was of the firearm, which cannot be denied to a particular ground of firing by the two persons including the applicant. 8. Considering the gravity of the offence, no good ground for grand of bail is made out. Accordingly the bail application is rejected. 9. The trial court is directed to expedite the trial without giving any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties. November 24, 2025 akverma BAIL No. 5757 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench