Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:120372 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23550 of 2025 Applicant :- Kapil Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Gautam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and perused the record. By means of this bail application, applicant Kapil Kumar, who is involved in Case Crime No. 74 of 2024, under Sections 147, 148, 307 IPC, police station Jawan, district Aligarh seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that a first information report was lodged on 13.03.2024 against seven named accused, namely, Nitesh, Kapil (present applicant), Ayush, Shekhar, Dushyant, Mohit, Aman and three unknown persons making allegation inter alia of assault to injured Mohit. After culmination of investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted against five accused persons, namely, Kapil, Nitesh, Shekhar, Ayush and Dushyant, out of them, Ayush and Shekhar have been declared juvenile and other co-accused Dushyant and Nitesh have been granted bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 22.04.2025 and 30.04.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4256 of 2025 and 14282 of 2025. It is also submitted that in x-ray report, no fracture was found and it is not clear that which injury was caused by whom. The applicant does not have any criminal history to his credit. Lastly, it is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no chance of the applicant fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.06.2025 and in case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate with the trial. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant reiterating the prosecution case by contending that total seven injuries are found on the body of the injured Mohit, out of which, injury nos. 1 and 2 are grievous in nature caused by hard and blunt object whereas injury nos. 3, 4 and 5 are simple in nature caused by hard and blunt object. Injury no. 6 is in the nature of contusion and injury no.7 is in the nature of abrasion. Referring the injury report, it is also pointed out that left temporal bone of the injured was found fractured. He further submits that injured in his statement has made allegation of assault against the accused persons specifying the weapon of assault, which was carried by them at the time of incident. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that injured in his statement specified that accused Nitesh, Kapil (applicant), Ayush, Shekhar, Dushyant were armed with hockey, wooden bat, axe, brass fist and pistol came on motorcycles. They attacked from all side and badly beaten him. Tanuj, Pradeep and Monu were the eye-witnesses of the incident and they have also supported the prosecution case, which is also corroborated from the injury report of injured. So far as submission of learned counsel for the applicant that co-accused Dushyant and Nitesh have been granted bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court is concerned, on perusal of bail order dated 22.04.2025, I find that while arguing bail application on behalf of co- accused Dushyant, it was submitted that there is no mention of any injury caused by the weapon (country-made pistol / Katta) shown in the hand of Dushyant. Hence in the light of injuries found on the body of injured, case of Dushyant is distinguishable from the case of applicant. On perusal of bail order dated 30.04.2025, I find that while arguing bail application on behalf of co- accused Nitesh, it was submitted that no deadly weapon has been shown in his hand and no specific allegation has been made by the complainant that who assaulted whom with which weapon. Whereas it is specific case of the prosecution that there is only one injured Mohit who received seven injuries. The injured in his statement has clearly assigned the weapon of assault in the hands of all the accused persons. Nitesh has also been assigned to cause injury by hockey. This Court is of the view that fatal injury can be caused by the hard and blunt object. Injured received seven injuries on the right and left of head, right upper arm, back of the back left leg. The CT scan of the injured reveals a fracture in his left temporal bone along with bleeding, swelling and extradural hematoma in the left temporal area, which is a vital and sensitive part of the body. Two injuries out of seven are grievous in nature as noted above. In view of the above, I do not find good ground to consider the bail of the applicant on the ground of parity of bail order of co-accused Dushyant and Nitesh. The statement of injured cannot be disbelieved at this stage. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the submissions advanced on behalf of parties, gravity of offence, role assigned to applicant and severity of punishment and statement of injured, I do not find any good ground to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. It is made clear that the observation contained in the instant order is confined to the issue of bail and shall not affect the merit of the trial. Order Date :- 23.7.2025 Shubham Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM KUMAR AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad