HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29822 of 2025 Court No. - 87 HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant; learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. 2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Rahul Kumar with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.144/2025, under Sections 352, 115(2), 109(1), 61(2) BNS, Police Station T.P. Nagar, District- Meerut, during pendency of trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. Co-accused Anshul has already been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.06.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.18846 of 2025. As per FIR, applicant Rahul Kumar has caused injury with knife in the stomach of the injured Shiv Kumar. Injured Shiv Kumar has also stated in his statement under Section 180 BNSS that the applicant has caused injury in his stomach with knife. In the medical report/evidence, only one injury was found on the injured. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 16.03.2025. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 4. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant and submitted that charge-sheet has already been filed in this case. However, he could not dispute the fact that as per medical report, only one injury was found on the person of injured, which was caused by the applicant. The Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anand Ji Mishra, Kaushal Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rahul Kumar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) dimension of the injury is 55x45 mm in the anterior abdominal wall. 5. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, bail application is allowed. 6. Considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid 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 with the following conditions that :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A I.P.C./269 B.N.S. (iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 B.N.S.S. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A I.P.C./209. B.N.S. (v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. If in the BAIL No. 29822 of 2025 2 opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 7. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 8. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. September 8, 2025 Radhika BAIL No. 29822 of 2025 3 (Santosh Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- RADHIKA VISHWAKARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad