Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:110697 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8569 of 2025 Applicant :- Oshiyaar Rajbhar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Janardhan Yadav,Rajan Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State. By means of this application, applicant-Oshiyaar Rajbhar, who is involved in Case Crime No. 324 of 2024, under Sections 109, 3(5) B.N.S. and Section 4/25 Arms Act, Police Station Ubhaon, District Ballia, seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial. As per prosecution case, in brief, the informant who is uncle of the victim lodged a first information report on 03.11.2024 for the alleged offence under Section 109 of B.N.S., 2023 against applicant-Oshiyar Rajbhar and co-accused Munna Yadav with the allegations inter alia that on 02.11.2024 at about 8 P.M. after Shri Laxmi Pujan Ceremony, when people of his village along with members of the management committee were going to village Indauli for immersion of the idol of Lakshmiji, on the way, applicant along with co-accused attacked informant's nephew on his neck with a sharp weapon with the intention to kill him. After sustaining injury, the injured was taken to Community Health Centre, Siyar, where after primary treatment, he was referred to higher centre for better treatment. F.I.R. further alleges that many people witnessed the incident who told that the applicant has committed the offence on instigation of co-accused Munna Yadav. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case due to village parti-bandi and local politics in election of Village Pradahn as well as enmity with informant's family. Incident took place on 02.11.2024 at about 20:00 hours, but F.I.R. was lodged on 03.11.2025 at 00:24 hours, whereas police station is situated at the distance of 6 kms. There is no independent witness of the incident. He further submits that at the time of incident he was sleeping at his home. The applicant does not have any criminal history to his credit. The incident had not taken place in the manner as alleged by the prosecution. Lastly, it is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is languishing in jail since 04.11.2024 and in case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of the complainant and the injured were recorded, in which they have made specific allegation of causing knife injury against the applicant on the instigation of co-accused Munna Yadav. As per the injury report of the injured, he has sustained grievous injury on his neck. Statements of other witnesses namely, Bhullan, Janardan and Sumer Singh were also recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., in which also they have supported the prosecution case. The alleged knife, which was used in commission of crime, was also recovered from the possession of the applicant. Hence, bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that as per prosecution case, many people witnessed the alleged incident. Complainant and injured both in their statements supported the prosecution case. Other witnesses, namely, Bhullan, Janardan and Sumer Singh have also supported the prosecution case. As per injury report, the injured received cut injury on left side of neck. The knife alleged to be used in the incident has also recovered from the possession of the applicant. As on date, the statement of the injured cannot be disbelieved. The manner, in which crime has been committed by the applicant, is matter of serious concern. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the submissions advanced on behalf of parties, gravity of offence, role assigned to applicant, nature of injury and severity of punishment, I do not find any good ground to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. It is made clear that the observation contained in the instant order is confined to the issue of bail and shall not affect the merit of the trial. Order Date :- 10.7.2025 Kashifa Digitally signed by :- KASHIFA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad