Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:143561 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26088 of 2025 Applicant :- Bijendra Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J. 1-Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2-By means of this bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., applicant-Bijendra Yadav, who is involved in Case Crime No.234 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 109, 3(5) of B.N.S., 2023 Police Station Sector- 113, Noida, District Gautam Buddh Nagar seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial. 3-Brief facts of the case, which are required to be stated are that the complainant, who is father of the injured got a first information report lodged on 28.05.2025 for the offence under Sections 115(2), 352, 109 of B.N.S., 2023 against Kapil and his two associates making allegation inter-alia that when his son Vikash along with his uncle Sumit was returning on motorcycle after taking meal from A Square Mall situated at Sector 73, Noida, on the way, Kapil along with his friends were standing. They stopped them and started abusing and beating them. On making protest, Kapil fired shot, which hit to his son, who was taken to hospital by Sumit. 4-Main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. Later-on, he and Passu, who happens to be brothers of named accused Kapil, have been falsely implicated in this case. Much emphasis has been given by contending that the injured-Vikas and Sumit already knew named accused Kapil and applicant, even then applicant was not named in F.I.R.. It is further submitted that during investigation, when statement of injured Vikash, Sumit and Sachin was recorded by the Investigating Officer, they have named the applicant also assigning the role of exhortation to him but they have specifically stated inter-alia that Kapil had fired shot, which hit to injured’s thigh. It is further submitted that injured has received one gun shot injury at his thigh, which has been attributed to accused Kapil. So far as the Passu is concerned, it is submitted that no role has been attributed to him except that he was also present there at the time of incident. It is also pointed out that the applicant has criminal history of eight cases, in which the applicant is on bail, which have been explained in paragraph no.3 of the supplementary affidavit dated 08.08.2025. The said offences are not heinous in nature, therefore, the applicant, who is languishing in jail since 11.06.2025 is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Lastly, it is submitted that in case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 5-On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant but could not dispute the factual aspect of the matter as argued on behalf of the applicant. 6-Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that the applicant has not been assigned role of assault or causing injury to the injured Vikash, which has been attributed to co-accused Kapil. Hence, considering the role of exhortation against the applicant, his case is distinguishable and stands on better footing then that of co-accused Kapil. 7-Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a prima facie case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application is hereby allowed. 8-Let the applicant- Bijendra Yadav, 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 before the release of the applicant on bail. 9-In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant. 10-It is made clear that benefit/parity of this order shall not be extended to the co-accused Kapil. Order Date :- 21.8.2025//Sanjeet Digitally signed by :- SANJEET KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SANJEET KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad