HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26729 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard counsel for the applicant, Sri Bipin Kumar, counsel for the informant and Sri Shashank Shekhar Pandey, learned AGA for the State- opposite party. Perused the material available on record. 2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 106 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 352, 105 B.N.S., Police Station- Chandauli, District- Chandauli, during the pendency of the trial. 3. 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 three named co-accused is alleged to have caused injury to the father of the informant. Father of the informant died during the course of treatment at B.H.U. Trauma Centre, Varanasi. Placing reliance on the post-mortem report it is contended that deceased received three injuries. Injury No.1 was on the head and the other injuries were on non vital parts of the body. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender who caused injury on the head of the injured. It is next contended that it is a cross case. In the alleged incident, the mother of the applicant also received life threatening injuries. She also lodged a first information report against the informant, registered as Case Crime No.0114 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 352, 110, 125 B.N.S., Police Station Chandauli, District Chandauli. Further, identically placed co-accused Sushil Singh has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 22.9.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.26411 of 2025. The applicant claims parity. The applicant is in jail since 21.05.2025, having no criminal history and in case, Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kabeer Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Bipin Kumar, G.A., Mohd. Naushad Siddiqui Naveen Singh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned AGA and counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that a vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant; the applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender who caused injury on the head of the injured; it is a cross case; in the alleged incident, the mother of the applicant also received life threatening injuries and she also lodged a first information report against the informant and identically placed co-accused Sushil Singh has been granted bail by this Court. Further, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and has remained confined for more than four and half months and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when 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, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant Naveen Singh, involved in the aforesaid 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 the conditions that he: (i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (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 8, 2025 Manish Kr BAIL No. 26729 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad