HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32354 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shashank Shekhar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party. 2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 194 of 2024, under Sections 105, 115(2), 110 B.N.S., Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Banda during the pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per the first information report the applicant along with co-accused Nem Bhau Dhuriya is alleged to have assaulted the brother of the informant. The brother of the informant succumbed to his injuries on 19.09.2024. According to the statement of the doctor, the death was caused due to head injury. In the statement of three independent witnesses namely Uday Bhan @ Bauwa, Rakesh and Chhotey Lal specific role of assault on the head of the deceased Nanku has been assigned to co-accused Nem Bhau Dhuriya. The case of the applicant is clearly distinguishable from that of co-accused Nem Bhau Dhuriya. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant is in jail since 21.09.2024 and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Santosh Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Chotu Varma .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that according to the statement of the doctor, the death was caused due to head injury and in the statement of three independent witnesses specific role of assault on the head of the deceased Nanku has been assigned to co-accused Nem Bhau Dhuriya. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for more than one year and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, and no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant- Chotu Varma, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that he: (i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and, (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. October 10, 2025 SKT/- BAIL No. 32354 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad