Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:126244 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23668 of 2025 Applicant :- Rahul Prajapati Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Bharti,Kamlesh Prasad,Ved Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J. 1-Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State. 2-By means of this bail application under Section 483 BNSS, applicant-Rahul Prajapati, who is involved in Case Crime No.156 of 2025, under Sections 109, 352 of B.N.S., 2023, Police Station Kaptanganj, District Kushi Nagar seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial. 3-Brief facts of the case, which are required to be stated are that the complainant, who is mother of the injured Rajan Sharma got a first information report lodged on 22.04.2025 for the alleged offence under Sections 352, 109 of B.N.S. against the applicant-Rahul Prajapati and co-accused Ravi Sharma making allegation inter-alia that on 21.04.2025 at about 10:00 PM, the accused persons called her son, Rajan Sharma and Aakash Yadav of her village by deceit and took them to qazi ji’s temple outside the village and started abusing on the basis of old rivalry. Thereafter they with intention to kill attacked and stabbed them with knifes. Due to the knife attack, injured Aakash Yadav’s intestine came out and Rajan Sharma was stabbed in his chest. 4-Main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that in the F.I.R., general role of causing knife injuries has been assigned to the accused persons but it has not been specified that who caused knife injury to whom. It is next submitted that on 22.04.2025, co-accused Ravi was apprehended and from his possession a knife, which was used in the commission of the crime was recovered. The applicant was arrested on 23.04.2025 but no weapon was recovered from him possession, therefore, the applicant, who has no criminal history and is languishing in jail since 23.04.2025 is liable to be enlarged on bail. 5-On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that two persons, namely, Rajan Sharma and Akash Yadav have received knife injuries in the said incident. The prosecution case is corroborated from the statement of injured and injury report. Hence, bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected. 6-Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that applicant-Rahul Prajapati and co-accused Ravi Sharma, both are named in F.I.R. and specific role of stabbing has been attributed to them. Injured Rajan Sharma received stab injury over left side of chest and left axilla and injured Akash Yadav received penetrating injury on his abdomen. In the CT report dated 22.04.2025 of Aakash Yadav “Anterior abdominal wall defect in left lumber region with herniation of peritoneal fat through the defect. Multiple air foci in muscular and subcutaneous plane in left lumber region extending up to left side paraumbilical region. Extensive peritoneal and subcutaneous fatstranding in left lumber region “are mentioned. The prosecution case is also corroborated from the statement of both the injured persons, which cannot be disbelieved at this stage. 7-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, nature of injury and severity of punishment, I do not find any good ground to release the applicant on bail. 8-Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 9-It is made clear that the observations contained in the instant order are confined to the issue of bail and shall not affect the merit of the trial. Order Date :- 30.7.2025 Sanjeet Digitally signed by :- SANJEET KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad