HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29156 of 2025 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Sanjay Kr. Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Harshit Pathak, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.99 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 352, 351(2), 3(5), 103(1) B.N.S., Police Station Nagal, District Saharanpur, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, an altercation was going on between the neighbors of the informant whereby his sister aged about 8 years is stated to have went there who was assaulted by Nazim by iron rod on her head thereby injuring her grievously. All the persons are stated to have hurled abuses at the informant and other persons. The informant rushed the deceased person for treatment whereby injured person was admitted in a serious condition in AIIMS, Rishikesh and she expired there subsequently. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about nine hours and there is no explanation to the said delay caused. There are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons. The FIR itself indicates that there was no motive of the applicant or any of the accused person to commit the murder of the minor daughter of the informant. The deceased incidentally went to the place of occurrence where two parties Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Kr. Srivastava, Sanjay Kr. Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Anurag Pathak, G.A., Harshit Pathak Farman .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) were having an altercation. It is further argued that there is a statement of another injured person Mustaqim who has also alleged the allegations of assaulting him to Nazim, as such the role of applicant is at a different footing to the main accused person Nazim. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 06.04.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the fact that there was general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons except that of Nazim who has been assigned the role of assaulting the deceased with iron rod, 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. 9. Let the applicant- Farman, 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. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 11. 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 9, 2025 Karan BAIL No. 29156 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- KARAN KUMAR RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad