HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16348 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Prabhat Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Varun Pratap Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.87 of 2025, under Sections 74, 109, 115(2), 352, 351(3) B.N.S. and Section 4/25 Arms Act, Police Station- Sikanderpur, District-Ballia, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant used to outrage the modesty of the elder sister of the informant every now and then whereby the father of the informant went to ask the applicant to refrain from doing so, as such, the applicant is stated to have hurled abuses at him and had stabbed him on 01.04.2025 at about 08:00 PM. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. FIR is delayed by about four hours and there is no explanation to the said delay caused. The injury sustained are not on vital part of the body and no bony injury has been observed. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the said injured person was taken to the hospital and there are inconsistencies in the injuries sustained. Initially, at the time of medical examination, three injuries were observed by the Doctor, but subsequently only two injuries were observed at the time of his treatment in Varanasi. The said injuries are found to be lacerations, but it has been mentioned that the said injuries were stab injuries Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Prabhat Kumar Singh, Rajat Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Raju Rajbhar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) and the said injury goes unexplained. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 03.04.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that Doctor has categorically opined that injuries were grievous in nature, as such, applicant is not entitled for bail. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the said inconsistency in the number of injuries, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant-Raju Rajbhar, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 11. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. September 12, 2025 Karan BAIL No. 16348 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- KARAN KUMAR RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad