HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24564 of 2025 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J. 1. Heard Sri Mohan Kant Baghel, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jitendra Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Alok Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.231 of 2025, under Sections-115(2), 118(2), 351(2), 352 BNS, Police Station-Dakshin, District-Firozabad, during the pendency of the trial. 3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant has been falsely implicated and there is only one injury which does not fall within the premise of Section 118(2) of BNS. The above injuries have been caused to the injured during scuffling. It is further submitted that charge sheet has been filed in the present case, therefore, there is no requirement of custodial interrogation. Applicant has also explained the criminal history of one case which is petty in nature and he is languishing in jail since 10.03.2025. In case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that specific allegation against the applicant for hitting the eyes of injured with fist which resulted in serious injuries in the eyes and present applicant had to remain hospitalised in super speciality hospital for considerable length of time. Therefore, applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. After considering the aforesaid submissions and taking into account that the applicant had hit the eyes of the injured which resulted in grievous injuries, there is no allegation that the applicant repeated the blow. Therefore, it cannot be said that the applicant has intended to cause serious injuries to the injured and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant- Shiva Dhakare @ Tenta, involved in the aforementioned crime Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohan Kant Baghel Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Jetendra Kumar Pandey Shiva Dhakare Alias Tenta .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 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, with the following conditions:- i. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. ii. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely without seeking any adjournment. iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed by him. 7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 8. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. October 13, 2025 S.C. BAIL No. 24564 of 2025 2 (Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM CHAURASIA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad