Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:134788 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27449 of 2025 Applicant :- Gopi Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mahendra Pratap Singh,Pawan Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Mahendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and as well as Sri Ram Mohit Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 117 of 2025, under Sections 103(1) & 351(2) of BNS, Police Station - Parasrampur, District - Basti, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the informant's father had called him and stated that he was being beaten up by the applicant, as such, the informant reached there and found the applicant assaulting his father, thereby caused grievous injuries to him and ran away from the place of occurrence on 24.04.2025 at about 07:00 PM. The informant rushed his father to the hospital whereby he succumbed to injuries on the way. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by about four hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has also stated that the other witnesses have not seen the incident rather they have stated that they have seen the applicant running away near the scene of occurrence, as such, the applicant is entitled for bail. 7. Learned counsel has next contended that the entire story has been cooked up by the informant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.04.2025, having no criminal history to his credit. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial. 8. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that there are nine injuries sustained by the deceased person i.e. lacerated wound, contusions and abrasions which led to the death of the deceased person. The postmortem report corroborates the prosecution story as the cause of death of the deceased person was shock & hemorrhage as a result of ante- mortem head injury, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and also considering the fact that the applicant is the sole accused in the instant case and the deceased sustained nine injuries in all, I do not find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. 10. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. 11. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously, in view of the principle laid down in the recent judgements 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. 12. 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. Order Date:- 8.8.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad