Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:82809 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15897 of 2025 Applicant :- Muneel Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Vaishya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri R.K. Vaishya, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vijay Bahaur Maurya, learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 542 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 3(5), 352, 351(3) B.N.S., Police Station Cantt, District Bareilly during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however, applicant is named in the FIR but only general role has been assigned to all the accused. He further submits, when the statements of eye witnesses were recorded then they stated that applicant was having axe in his hand. 4. He further submits, from the post mortem report of the deceased, it reflects, deceased did not sustain any injury, which was caused by axe and he sustained two lacerated wounds on his parietal region, therefore, it reflects, applicant did not cause any injury to the deceased. 5. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 05.12.2024. 6. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 8. However, applicant was named in the FIR along with two others and as per allegation made in the FIR he along with others made assault due to which father of the informant died but when the statement of eye witnesses were recorded during investigation then they stated that applicant was having axe in his hand and other accused persons were having wooden sticks and from the post mortem report it reflects, deceased sustained two lacerated wound on his parietal region. Considering this fact, the argument advance by learned counsel for the applicant that in the light the statements of eye witnesses, it reflects, applicant did not cause any injury to the deceased, cannot be ruled out at this stage. 9. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 05.12.2024. 10. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 11. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 12. Let the applicant - Muneel 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. 13. 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. 14. 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 :- 17.5.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad