HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24107 of 2025 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Virendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arun Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.195 of 2025, under Sections 105, 62(2) B.N.S., Police Station- Madiyahu, District- Jaunpur, during the pendency of trial. PROSECUTION STORY: 4. The FIR was instituted by the informant against Sonu Mishra and one unknown person stating that the bearer of mobile no.7007996483 had called her husband to some place and after some time the informant learnt that the said two persons were beating her husband near Baba Ji Ki Kuti. 5. The villagers reached there and the deceased was found gasping and wanted to say something but could not speak clearly, as such, he was rushed to district hospital, Jaunpur, whereby the deceased had expired. 6. The informant is stated to have learnt from the passersby that it was the named accused person Sonu Mishra who had committed the said offence. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT: Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhishek Tiwari, Virendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Arun Kumar Pandey, G.A., Suman Mishra Shivam Mishra .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 7. The applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. 8. The FIR is delayed by about six hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. Even the said delayed FIR does not contain the name of the applicant and his name has been subsequently added, which has come up in the statement of co-accused person Harshit. 9. Subsequently two witnesses, namely, Arvind Tiwari and Rita Tiwari, have been roped in who have stated that the deceased had told them that it was the applicant, co-accused person Sonu Mishra and two others, 04 persons in all, who had assaulted him. 10. The injuries sustained by the deceased person itself indicate that it was not possible for the deceased person to tell the said witnesses about the name of assailants. The FIR itself indicates that deceased person was unable to speak rather he was murmuring something. 11. It is a blind murder and the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case out of vengeance as an afterthought. Had the applicant committed the said offence and it had come to the knowledge of the informant, she would have nominated the applicant in the FIR itself. 12. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 22.5.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE/OPPOSITE PARTY: 13. The bail application has been opposed on the ground that the deceased person had narrated the story to Arvind Tiwari and Rita Tiwari on way to hospital and he expired before reaching the hospital. CONCLUSION: 14. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the fact that FIR is delayed by about six hours and the BAIL No. 24107 of 2025 2 applicant is not named in it, 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. 15. Let the applicant- Shivam Mishra, 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 pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 16. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 17. 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 1, 2025 Vikas Verma BAIL No. 24107 of 2025 3 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad