HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26981 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Sudhanshu Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Sri Kaushlendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Deepak Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.27 of 2025, under Sections 103(1), 115(2), 351(3), 352 B.N.S, Police Station Bidhanu, District Kanpur Nagar with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant and other co-accused person are stated to have assaulted and caused injuries to the informant and her husband, thereupon had also caused injuries to her two and half years old son, thereby hitting his head on 02.02.2025 at about 6:00 p.m. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that there are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons. It is a case of sudden provocation. It was not premeditated offence committed by the applicant, as such, he is entitled for bail. The applicant is in jail since 03.02.2025 and is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the FIR is prompt and even the informant had sustained Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kaushlendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shiva Yadav Alias Jitendra .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) injuries and the deceased person has been put to death by the applicant and co-accused person only, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the promptness of FIR and the deceased having succumbed to the injuries sustained, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 8. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously as early as possible in view of the principle as has been laid down in the recent judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab; 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India; (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment. 9. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. October 9, 2025 (Ravi Kant) BAIL No. 26981 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad