Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:146301 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21564 of 2025 Applicant :- Kalandar Yadav And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Swati Agrawal Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- Amar Bahadur Singh,Ashok Kumar Singh,G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Ms. Swati Agrawal Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicants seek bail in Case Crime No.42 of 2025, under Sections 103(1), 115(2), 352, 351(2), 191(2) B.N.S., Police Station Gopiganj, District Bhadohi, during the pendency of trial. PROSECUTION STORY: 4. The applicants alongwith co-accused persons, namely, Pramod Yadav and Rahul Yadav, are stated to have assaulted the brothers of the informant Ranjay Yadav and Gulab s/o Baijnath and also his daughter Arti Yadav over an altercation regarding the erection of a wall on 01.02.2025 at about 7:30 a.m. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT: 5. The applicants are absolutely innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. 6. The FIR is delayed by about eight hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 7. The said delay implies that the FIR was instituted after due consideration and deliberations, but despite it, the named accused person Rahul Yadav has been exonerated by the prosecution, as they have stated that he was not involved in the said case, but subsequently they have added three more accused persons, namely, Akshay, Pankaj and Golu, as an afterthought. 8. The said vacillating statements of the witnesses indicate false implication. 9. Subsequently, the statement of one of the injured person Arti Yadav was also recorded and she has assigned the role of assaulting the deceased person Ranjay Yadav to Pramod Yadav and not the applicants. 10. There are general and omnibus allegations against the applicants that too assaulting the two injured persons. The two injured persons had sustained two injuries each only. 11. It is true that the deceased person had sustained eight injuries in all and he succumbed to the said injuries. 12. The case to the maximum may fall within the purview of culpable homicide not amounting to murder, but the case has been transformed to that of murder under duress. 13. There is no criminal history of the applicants. The applicants are languishing in jail since 06.02.2025 and they are ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicants are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE/INFORMANT: 14. The informant has assigned general role to all the accused persons, as such, the applicants are equally liable for the offence committed by them as well as Pramod Yadav, as such, they are not entitled for bail. CONCLUSION: 15. The case of the applicants stands distinguished to the main accused person Pramod Yadav. 16. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration that the informant has assigned general role to the applicants and the fact that the deceased person has been assaulted by co-accused Pramod Yadav, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 17. Let the applicants- Kalandar Yadav and Sandeep Yadav, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on 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 applicants shall not tamper with evidence during trial. (ii) The applicants shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicants shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 18. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 19. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicants shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 23.8.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad