HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28281 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Vikrant Rana, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ankit Tiwari, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.244 of 2025, under Sections 109(1) B.N.S. and 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station- Partapur, District- Meerut, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant alongwith other accused persons is stated to have fired at the brothers of the informant causing gunshot injuries to Nitin Bikal and Jatin Bikal on 16.6.2025 at about 09:30 p.m. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. There are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons in the FIR, but subsequently the injured persons had assigned the role of causing gunshot injury to co- accused person Avanish only. As such, the applicant is entitled for bail. 6. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the criminal history of two cases assigned to the applicant stands explained as the proceedings of said cases have been stayed. The applicant is languishing in jail since 4.7.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vikrant Rana Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ankit Tiwari, G.A. Kapil .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 7. The Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2020 (11) SCC 648 has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail, if otherwise his case of bail is made out. 8. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that applicant and co- accused persons were assigned the similar role in the FIR, as such, he is not entitled for bail. 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 fact that the injured persons had not assigned the role of firing to the applicant and there being general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons in the FIR, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima facie, 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- Kapil, 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 pressurize/intimidate 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. (Krishan Pahal,J.) September 16, 2025 Vikas Verma BAIL No. 28281 of 2025 2 Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad