Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:76900 Court No. - 68 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12740 of 2025 Applicant :- Praveen Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bindeshwari Prasad Mishra,Satyendra Narayan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mahendra Kumar Maurya Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today, which is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Satyendra Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mahendra Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for informant, Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State- respondents and perused the record. 3. This bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant, Praveen, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 698 of 2024, under Sections 109, 333, 352, 3 (5) BNS and 3/25/27 Arms Act, Police Station Kosikalan, District Mathura. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused- applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this case crime number and is languishing in jail since 30.01.2025. He has criminal antecedent of two cases, which has been explained in para 3 of the supplementary affidavit and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the incident took place on 25.11.2024 and its FIR was lodged on 27.11.2024 without giving any explanation regarding delay in lodging the FIR. The injured was medically examined on 25.11.2024. As per the injury report the injured has received two injuries. The injuries sustained by the injured is on non vital part of the body. The alleged recovery of tanamcha has been shown from the possession of applicant, which is planted one and there is no eyewitness of the alleged recovery. The investigating officer after completing investigation, submitted charge sheet on 30.12.2024. It is next submitted that as per the statement of doctor, the applicant himself admitted the injured in the hospital. No offence is made out against the applicant under Section 109 of BNS. The entire prosecution story is false, fabricated and doubtful. Hence, bail has been prayed for. 5. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the first informat vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts. 6. Considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the accused-applicant, Praveen, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence. 2. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity. 3. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial. 4. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned. 9. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail. Order Date :- 9.5.2025 v.k.updh. Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad