HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33889 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party. 2. The present bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 126 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 117(2), 333, 115(2), 352, 105 B.N.S., Police Station- Naraini, District- Banda during pendency of the trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The name of the applicant was disclosed by the informant in his statement under Section 180 B.N.S.S. As per the statement of the doctor, cause of death of Jagdev is attributed to pre-existing disease. It is next contended that the injuries sustained by the informant were simple in nature. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as a principal offender, who caused injuries to the deceased and the informant. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 29.01.2025. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not named in the first information report. The name of the applicant was disclosed by the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Love Lesh Kumar Verma, Phool Chandra Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rajkumar Alias Rammilan .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) informant in his statement under Section 180 B.N.S.S. As per the statement of the doctor, cause of death of Jagdev is attributed to pre-existing disease. Further, the injuries received by the informant were simple in nature. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as a principal offender, who caused injuries to the deceased and the informant. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for more than eight months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, and no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant- Rajkumar @ Rammilan, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that he: (i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and, (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. October 14, 2025 SKT/- BAIL No. 33889 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad