Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:89892 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14238 of 2025 Applicant :- Dushyant Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ardhendu Shekhar Sharma,Ram Babu Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- Akhilesh Srivastava,G.A.,Saksham Srivastava Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Ram Babu Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant; SriSaksham Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Shatrughan Yadav, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 426 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 109, 115(2), 352, 351(3), 61(2), 103(2) BNS, Police Station Khair, District Aligarh, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 4. FIR of the present case was lodged on 16.8.2024 at 9:18 hours against the applicant and five others and according to the FIR on 14.8.2024 at about 6:30 p.m. applicant and other accused persons intercepted the son of the informant and co-accused Hariom made exhortation and after that applicant inflicted knife injury on his head and thereafter they started beating him through kicks and fists and thereafter on the exhortation of the co-accused Kuldeep, co- accused Sajal inflicted injury on his head. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that initally FIR of the present case was lodged under section 109 BNS and other sections but after the death of the injured, case was converted under section 103 BNS. 6. He further submitted that however, from the FIR and first statement of the alleged eye witnesses it reflects applicant by knife caused head injury to the deceased but when from the post mortem report it reflected, actually deceased died due to cerebral damage consequent to blunt force impact to the head then thereafter in their second statements alleged eye witnesses including informant started making allegation that through wooden stick applicant made assault upon the head of the deceased and this fact clearly suggests that actually nobody could see the real incident and on the basis of false allegations due to previous enmity, applicant has been made accused in the present matter. 7. He further submitted that considering the major contradictions in the first statements of the witnesses and their second statements it cannot be said that applicant made assault upon the deceased. 8. He further submitted that however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of two other cases but his criminal history has been explained in the instant bail application and in both the cases applicant is on bail. 9. He further submitted that in the present matter applicant is in jail since 21.8.2024 i.e. for last more than 8 months. 10. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant is named in the FIR and from the FIR and statements of the witnesses, it reflects, he was principal accused but they could not dispute the fact that in the FIR and in the first statements of the witnesses knife has been assigned to the applicant but when their second statements were recorded then they stated that applicant used wooden sticks and therefore, there are material contradictions in the statements of the witnesses as far as weapon assigned to the applicant is concerned. 11. Learned AGA however further pointed out that actually apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of four other cases and he explained criminal history of only two cases in the instant bail application but he fairly conceded that unexplained cases relate to minor offence. 12. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 13. However, applicant is named in the FIR and as per allegation made in the FIR applicant caused knife injury on the head of the deceased and similar allegations have been made by all the witnesses in their first statements recorded during investigation but after the post mortem report when their second statements were recorded then they changed their earlier version and started making allegation that applicant made assault through wooden sticks therefore, there are material contradictions in their statements with regard to weapon assigned to the applicant. 14. Further, however, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of four other cases and he explained criminal history of only two cases but it appears, unexplained cases relate to minor offences. 15. Further, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 21.8.2024 i.e. for last more than 8 months. 16. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 17. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 18. Let the applicant-Dushyant, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 19. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 20. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 27.5.2025/Ankita Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad