HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26749 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri S.K. Upadhyay, Advocate holding brief of Sri Rajkapoor Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.572 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 109(1), 115(2), 131, 352, 351(2) B.N.S., Police Station- Kotwali Deoria, District- Deoria, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant alongwith five other named accused persons and about 10-12 unknown persons is stated to have assaulted the four persons belonging to the family of the informant, thereby causing injuries them on 27.5.2025 at about 06:30 p.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 five hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that medical examination of only three injured persons was conducted, as such, the prosecution story stands falsified. There is no injury report regarding the fourth person. Learned counsel has stated that there is cross-version to the instant case. Two persons from the side of applicant had also sustained injuries including the applicant. Even the applicant had sustained grievous Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajkapoor Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Nanhey Rajbhar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) injuries on his head. 7. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the injuries sustained by the applicant and other accused persons have not been explained by the prosecution, as such, non-explanation of the injuries of applicant and other co-accused person falsifies the prosecution story. There is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 29.5.2025 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. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the injuries sustained by the applicant and one another person from his side coupled with the fact that FIR is delayed by about five hours, and without expressing any opinion on the merits 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- Nanhey Rajbhar, 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 evidence during trial. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate 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. (Krishan Pahal,J.) September 10, 2025 Vikas Verma BAIL No. 26749 of 2025 2 Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad