Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:94118 Court No. - 68 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10359 of 2025 Applicant :- Rohit Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ankaj Kumar,Anshuman Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Vinay Kumar,G.A. Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J. Heard Sri Anshuman Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vinay Kumar, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Anil Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. This bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been moved on behalf of accused- applicant, Rohit Yadav, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 357 of 2024, under Sections 109(1), 3(5), 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3/25 of the Arms Act, Police Station- Tharvai, District- Prayagraj. Learned counsel for accused-applicant argued that the accused- applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number due to previous enmity and is languishing in Jail since 23.12.2024. There are contradictions in the alleged place of incident, as per the F.I.R version place of incident alleged to be Sheetalpur (Aara Machine Chauraha) where as per police site plan the alleged place of incident is shown to be a playground where cricket tournaments were organised. There are material contradictions in the statements of informant and victim. The alleged recovery of fire arm from the possession of the applicant is planted and manipulated by police. There is no independent witness of the alleged recovery. Co-accused Nirdosh Yadav has already been granted bail by the Trial Court. Criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraph-17 of the bail application. There is no likelihood of fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail with this contention that applicant is named accused in the F.I.R. Specific role of firing has been assigned to the applicant which is duly corroborated by the statement of the victim as well as of the informant who was present at the place of incident recorded by Investigating Officer during investigation. On the pointing out of the applicant weapon used in the incident was recovered. As per the injury report and supplementary report, victim sustained grievous fire arm injuries on his vital part (stomach). In this regard, the statement of Dr. Anwar Ahmad who prepared supplementary report of the victim is also on record, which is annexed as Annexure C.A.-1 to the counter affidavit. Having heard learned counsel for both sides and gone through materials on record. It is apparent that specific role of firing has been assigned to the applicant. Recovery of the firm arm was from the pointing of the applicant. Looking to the heinousness of offence of assault, statement of the victim recorded by the Investigating Officer, injuries sustained by the victim and medical examination report, likelihood of tampering with evidence in case of release on bail as well as likelihood of fleeing from course of justice, there appears to be no ground for bail. Accordingly, this Bail Application stands rejected. Order Date :- 26.5.2025 PS Digitally signed by :- POOJA SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad