HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11866 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record. 2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.339 of 2025, under Section 105 & 352 BNS, P.S. Kotwali, District Sitapur. 3. In terms of the FIR, allegations were levelled that on account of a property dispute, some injunction was granted, however, the accused in disobedience to the said injunction order, were trying to erect a wall and when the mother- in-law of the informant opposed the same, the applicant hurled abuses and threw a brick on her which resulted in injuries and subsequent death. Age of the deceased was 63 years. 4. In the light of the said, learned counsel for the applicant draws my attention to the postmortem report which indicates presence of contusion injuries on the right side of the back below axila, on the back of right arm above right elbow joint & on lateral aspect of left arm above left elbow joint, and multiple abrasion on the right leg just below right knee joint. In the light of the said, it is argued that the nature of injuries were not on the vital part and thus, the implication under Section 105 BNS was not justified. 5. Learned counsel for the informant, on the other hand, opposes the bail application by arguing that on account of the acts of the applicant, an old Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Nadeem Murtaza, Parth Anand Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Gaurav Agarwal .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) lady aged about 63 years died and considering the death of the senior citizen, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 6. It is not disputed by the parties that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is in custody since 05.11.2025. 7. Considering the arguments raised at the Bar and stated above, prima-facie, general allegations were levelled against all the accused including the applicant; no specific role was assigned to the applicant of having caused injuries by the use of brick, the cause of the dispute is also a petty dispute of civil nature in between the parties. As such, considering the prima-facie intent being missing coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, the applicant who is in custody since 05.11.2025 is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant Gaurav Agarwal be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions: (a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings; (b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and (c) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. December 2, 2025 nishant BAIL No. 11866 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench