Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:81867 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16592 of 2025 Applicant :- Nagendra Pratap Narayan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Prakash Chaturvedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Vijay Prakash Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 38 of 2025, under Sections 105, 115(2), 117(2) B.N.S., Police Station Siddharth Nagar, District Siddharth Nagar during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however, applicant is named in the FIR along with others but admittedly informant of the case was not along with the deceased at the time of incident and nephew of the informant Vikash was accompanying the deceased but from perusal of the FIR and statement of the informant it reflects, according to him when his nephew informed him about the incident then he immediately reached at spot and also saw the incident and this fact clearly suggests that on the basis of false allegation, applicant has been roped in the present matter due to previous enmity. 4. He further submits, applicant is brother of the informant and deceased was his nephew and enmity between both sides is admitted therefore it appears, implication of the applicant is the result of enmity. 5. He further submits, from the statement of the informant it reflects, number of other villagers also arrived at spot but during investigation their statements have not been recorded. 6. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 23.02.2025. 7. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant is specifically named in the FIR and it is a case in which as per allegation due to the assault made by the applicant one person died and one person sustained injuries and injured categorically reiterated the version of the FIR and he also sustained several injuries, therefore, there is no reason to disbelieve the prosecution case. 8. Learned AGA further submitted, as per post mortem report deceased sustained as many as 15 injuries, therefore, considering facts of the case applicant should not be released on bail. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 10. As per allegation, due to the assault made by the applicant and two others one person died and one person sustained injuries and from perusal of the post mortem report, it reflects, deceased sustained as many as 15 injuries. 11. Further, from the medical report of the injured, which was produced by learned AGA during the course of argument, it reflects, he also sustained as many as six injuries and from the medical report of the informant, which was also produced by learned AGA during the course of argument, it reflects, he also sustained four injuries, therefore, story narrated in the FIR and in the statements of the injured witnesses including informant and his nephew cannot be disbelieved at this stage. 12. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 13. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is rejected. 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 :- 16.5.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad