Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:143322 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25281 of 2025 Applicant :- Sandeep Kannaujiya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Brahma Nand Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vinay Kumar Jaiswal Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first informant / complainant. By means of this bail application, applicant Sandeep Kannaujiya, who is involved in Case Crime No. 304 of 2025, under Sections 109, 352, 115(2), 351(3), 191(2) BNS, police station Bansgaon, district Gorakhpur, seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial. As per prosecution case, in brief, complainant Kusmawati got an F.I.R. lodged on 25.05.2025 for the offence under Sections 109, 352, 115(2), 351(3), 191(2) BNS against Suraj Kannaujiya, Sandeep Kannaujiya (present applicant), Aaryan and 3-4 unknown persons making allegation inter alia that on 25.05.2025 at about 10:30 O'clock, accused persons were digging base for construction of house. On forbidding them by her husband Virendra Pal, they became furious and started abusing. Thereafter, Suraj and Vinod caught hold her husband and Aaryan assaulted him with fawda whereby he received serious injuries. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that complainant claims that she is an eye-witness of the incident but in the F.I.R., she has made allegation of abusing against the applicant whereas she attributed the role of catching hold to Suraj and Vinod and she has assigned the role of assault to Aaryan on her husband Virendra but later on, when statements of the complainant and injured were recorded by the Investigating Officer, they exonerating the accused Vinod substituted the applicant Sandeep Kannaujiya in his place attributing the role of catching hold. It is also argued that considering the role of the applicant, his case is distinguishable from the case of co-accused Aaryan. The applicant does not have any criminal history to his credit. Lastly, it is submitted 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 25.05.2025 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 as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that all the accused persons including the applicant were indulged in the said incident with common intention with their different role. The weapon of assault, i.e., fawda has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. Hence, bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that the applicant has not been attributed the role of assault to the complainant's husband Virendra and the same has been attributed to co-accused Aaryan. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed. Let the applicant Sandeep Kannaujiya be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable. (ii) That 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. (iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity. (iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned. In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail. It is made clear that benefit/parity of this order shall not be extended to co-accused Aaryan. Order Date :- 21.8.2025 Shubham Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM KUMAR AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad