HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23521 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Ankit Agarval, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Amit Kumar, learned State Law Officer and also perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 210 of 2025, under Sections 109(1), 115(2), 118(1) & 352 of BNS, Police Station - Dibai, District - Bulandshahr, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant and co-accused persons are stated to have got the informant/victim to drink liquor with them and had subsequently assaulted him with blade on 14.03.2025 at about 02:00 PM. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by about 14 days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has also stated that the role of assault has been assigned to both the accused persons in the FIR but subsequently the role of assaulting the injured with blade has been assigned to the applicant. The allegations are per se false as the victim/injured himself had instituted the FIR. Had the role of assault assigned by him in the statement recorded before police been shown, the same would have been mentioned in the FIR itself. 7. Learned counsel has next contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 05.04.2025, having no criminal history to his credit. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial. 8. Per contra, learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ankit Agarval Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Raju .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, delay in lodging the FIR and also considering the fact that the FIR was instituted by the injured himself and he has not specify the role of assault to the applicant in it, prima facie I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant- Raju, 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 tfhe court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 12. 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 15, 2025 Siddhant BAIL No. 23521 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad