HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27052 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Upendra Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Narayan Singh Kushwaha, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 17 of 2025, under Sections 109 of BNS and Section 3/25/27 of Arms Act, Police Station Nayagaon, District Etah, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have caused gun shot injury to the injured person on 22.02.2025 at about 10:30 a.m. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. The FIR is delayed by about seven hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has next stated that the allegations are per se false. There is only one injured person in the incident but the applicant himself has sustained injuries and the said injuries go unexplained. There is a cross version to the instant case as FIR No.28 of 2025 which was instituted after moving an application under section 175(3) BNSS. As there being cross version, at this point it cannot be ascertained as to which party is aggressor one, as such the applicant is entitled for bail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Upendra Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Narayan Singh(Kushwaha) Netrapal .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 7. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 04.03.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the injuries sustained by the injured person are grievous in nature and were found dangerous to life. However, the said document has not been annexed with the bail application. As such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record and without expression any opinion on the merit of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant- Netrapal, 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 the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 12. 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 11, 2025 Sumit S BAIL No. 27052 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad