HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23208 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Raj Narayan Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.121 of 2025, under Sections 109(1), 351(2), 352 B.N.S. and Section 67 I.T. Act, Police Station Ramgadh, District Firozabad, during the pendency of trial. 5. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have posted certain edited photographs of the sister of the informant on his Instagram I.D. and subsequently he is stated to have assaulted the informant on 23.02.2025 at about 9:30 p.m. by a knife, causing injury to him. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about two days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The injury is not on the vital organ of the body. Even the said injury cannot be sustained by a sharp edged weapon as the injury is simple in nature. Even the applicant has not posted any indecent photographs on Instagram I.D. The said I.D. has been used by one Manvi, who happens to be the daughter of Ramratan. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Raj Narayan Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shivam .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the statement of Manvi indicates that she had got the said SIM issued in the name of her father and herself used to operate the said mobile, but she has stated that sometimes the applicant and her brother also used to operate the said mobile and has suspected that the applicant might have posted the said indecent photographs. The said allegations are made up suspicion only and do not carry any weight whatsoever. The criminal history of two cases assigned to the applicant stands explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 04.05.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 9. The Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tewari vs. State of U.P. And Another, (2020) 11 SCC 648 has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail, if otherwise his case for bail is made out. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the delay in institution of FIR and the statement of the said witness Manvi, 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. 11. Let the applicant- Shivam, 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. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 13. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant BAIL No. 23208 of 2025 2 shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. September 10, 2025 (Ravi Kant) BAIL No. 23208 of 2025 3 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad