HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4976 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Vishal Agarwal, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Jitendra Pal Singh Jadaun, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Durg Vijay Singh, learned A.A.G. assisted by Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 320 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 352, 351(2), 109 of BNS, Police Station - Hathras Junction, District - Hathras, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant and other co-accused persons are stated to have assaulted the informant's grand-son on 03.09.2024 at about 08:30 PM. The co- accused Vijaypal Alias Naipali is stated to have caught hold of him and the applicant is stated to have caused stab wound to him, causing injuries to his abdomen. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by more than four hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has also stated that there are contradictions in the statement of the injured person to the FIR as in the FIR, time of offence is mentioned as 08:30 PM while in his statement, it is 03:30 PM. 7. Learned counsel has further contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 25.09.2024, having no criminal history to his credit. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial. 8. Per contra, learned AAG assisted by learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the FIR is prompt as it was instituted within a reasonable time. The doctor conducting the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vishal Agarwal Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Jitendra Pal Singh Jadaun Chottu Alias Dharamveer .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) medical examination and the treatment of the injured person, has categorically stated that the said injury was dangerous to life, as such, he is not entitled for bail. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, nature of offence, severity of punishment, period of incarceration, promptness of FIR and also considering the specific role assigned to the applicant of having caused stab wound to the victim which is dangerous to life as per the statement of doctor, prima facie I do not find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. 10. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. 11. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously, in view of the principle laid down in the recent judgements of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment. 12. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts 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. September 16, 2025 Siddhant BAIL No. 4976 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad