HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27079 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Aqueel Ahmad, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.241 of 2025, under Sections 109 and 61(2) B.N.S., Police Station Bisrakh, District Gautam Buddh Nagar, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have caused gunshot injury to the victim on 04.04.2025. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by more than three days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The prosecution story stands falsified from the fact that no time of offence is mentioned in the FIR. It is a clear-cut case of false implication as it has come up in the FIR itself that the applicant had fired at the victim on his back and it was not possible for him to see the occurrence. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the injury report corroborates the said fact that the injured person has sustained gunshot injury on his back. There was no motive for the applicant to commit the said offence. The motive carried, if any, might be of the other co-accused person, Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Aqueel Ahmad, Kripa Shankar Tiwari, Vaibhav Tyagi, Vinit Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sonu .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) but the applicant has been assigned the role of having fired at the injured person. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has also argued that there is no previous criminal history of the applicant except two cases which have been foisted on him subsequent to the instant FIR and he has yet to apply for bail in those cases. The applicant is languishing in jail since 08.04.2025 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. 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 citus of the injury sustained by the deceased person and the FIR being delayed by about three days, 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- Sonu, 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 pressurise/intimidate with 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. September 11, 2025 (Ravi Kant) BAIL No. 27079 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad