. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7326 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State; Shri Lalit Kishore Tiwari, learned counsel for the informant and perused the record. 2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.77 of 2025, under Section 103(1), 352, 351(3), 3(5) of BNS, P.S. Hardi, District Bahraich. 3. The FIR in question was lodged alleging that on 04.04.2025 at about 6 PM, the accused who are three in number named in the FIR, on account of enmity emanating from elections, attacked the brother of the informant and on the exhortation of the applicant namely Shivam Awasthi, co-accused Sachiv Awasthi who was carrying an illegal weapon in his hands caused firearm injury which resulted in firearm injury in the stomach of the brother of the informant. As regards the applicant, role of exhortation is assigned. It is stated that thereafter all the accused ran away. 4. In the light of the said, contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that no allegation of causing the firearm injury was attributed to the applicant. Even the postmortem report on record indicates the cause of death as firearm injury which is attributable to the fire allegedly caused by Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Aadarsh Mishra, Vashu Deo Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Rajendra Prasad Mishra Shivam Awasthi .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) the co-accused Sachiv Awasthi. 5. My attention is also drawn to the statement of the informant which has already been recorded during trial in which similar allegation as levelled in the FIR were made. 6. As regards the criminal antecedent, submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has two cases against him which are under Section 323, 504, 506 IPC & Section 131, 351(3), 352 BNS. 7. Learned counsel for the informant argues that all the co-accused had come with an intent of killing the brother of the informant and although, the applicant fired and the same did not hit the deceased, however, the intent was clear and thus, the bail application should be rejected. 8. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application. 9. Considering the submissions made at the Bar, admittedly, as per the FIR and the statement of the informant, it was a firearm injury attributable to the co-accused Sachiv Awasthi that resulted in the death of the deceased. As regards the applicant, the FIR as well as the statement do not attribute the firearm injury at the instance of the applicant. In view thereof, the applicant who is in custody since 07.04.2025 and there being nothing on record to demonstrate that the applicant, if enlarged on bail at this stage, can adversely affect the trial, is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant Shivam Awasthi be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of the like amount 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 BAIL No. 7326 of 2025 2 dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. October 13, 2025 nishant BAIL No. 7326 of 2025 3 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench