HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4934 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rahul Pal, Advocate holding brief of Sri Rahul Saxena, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned State Law Officer and also perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 427 of 2024, under Sections 109, 351(2), 3(5) of BNS, Police Station - Kotwali, District - Azamgarh, during the pendency of trial. 4. The informant learnt about the gun-shot injury sustained by her son on 26.07.2024 at about 05:00 PM as he has told the informant that the applicant and other co-accused persons have repeatedly tried to commit his murder but he somehow saved himself by pushing them, as such, he sustained injury on his hand. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued 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 five hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has also stated that the injured person in his statement recorded u/s 180 BNSS has categorically assigned the role of causing gun-shot injury to the applicant. It is argued that the said injury has been manufactured and the instant case has been instituted as a counterblast to the case of murder of applicant's father which was committed by the injured and his other family members. 7. Learned counsel has next contended that there is no previous criminal history of the applicant except a case foisted subsequently by showing false recovery of country made pistol. The applicant is languishing in jail since 02.08.2024. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amarjeet Yadav, Suneel Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Rahul Saxena, Sunita Chauhan Shani Sahni .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) with trial. 8. Per contra, learned State Law Officer and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the applicant is the main accused person and the injured person has categorically nominated him for the attempt to commit his murder but he somehow managed to save him by putting his hand between the country made pistol and the chest, as such, his life could be saved. 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 and also taking into consideration the delay in lodging the FIR and the injury sustained by the victim is not on vital part of the body, prima facie I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant- Shani Sahni, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 12. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. September 16, 2025 Siddhant BAIL No. 4934 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad