HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4013 of 2025 Court No. - 66 HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard Sri Praveen Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Purushottam Maurya, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record. 2. This bail application under Section 483 BNS has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant, Rajan Yadav, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 215 of 2024, under Sections 103 (1), 258 Kha BNS, Police Station Rajatalab, District Varanasi. 3. The allegation made in the FIR is that unknown person assaulted the father of the applicant on 21.11.2024 at Prathmic Vidhyalay Kachnar by Rod and danda due to which, he received grevious injury and during treatment he died. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused- applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this case crime number and is languishing in jail since 02.11.2024. He has no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is not named in the FIR, but the local police with malicious intention and on the basis of CCTV footage, has implicated the applicant in the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arunesh Kumar Singh, Ashutosh Mishra, Praveen Kumar Singh, Rajeev Kumar Saxena, Syed Imran Ibrahim, Virendra Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s): G.A. Rajan Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) present case. The applicant in son of the deceased and also the informant of the present case. As per the post mortem report, 5 ante mortem injuries have been found on the body of the deceased and cause of death is coma as a result of head injury. There is no eye witness of the alleged incident. There is no recovery against the applicant and the false recovery is planted one. It is next submitted that after completing investigation, investigating officer has submitted the charge sheet against the applicant under the aforesaid sections. Hence, bail has been prayed for. 6. Per contra learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant is real son of the deceased from the first wife and the co-accused is the step brother of the applicant and both have hatched conspiracy to commit murder of the deceased and both have confessed the crime of murder of the deceased because, the deceased wants to sale the entire land and nominate it to the third lady. It is next contended that the stick used in the crime has been recovered on the pointing out of the applicant. The applicant has no criminal history but he made accused of murder of his father and he is the informant of the present case which shows that just to conceal the evidence he lodged the FIR and if the applicant is released on bail he will abscond and tamper the prosecution witnesses as such he deserves no sympathy and is not entitled for bail, hence, bail application is liable to be rejected. 7. I have considered the rival submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. In the light of the facts and circumstances of the present case, it would be inappropriate to discuss the evidence in depth at this stage because it is likely to influence the trial of the accused. But, from the perusal of the evidences, collected during investigation so far, prima facie, the involvement of the accused in the present case cannot be ruled out. No reason is found to falsely implicate the applicant/accused. Therefore, there is no good ground to release the applicant-accused on bail at this stage. All the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant pertain to the merits of the case and the same cannot be considered while considering application for grant of bail. This court is unable to form an opinion at this stage that BAIL No. 4013 of 2025 2 the accused has not committed an offence. 9. In the ultimate conclusion, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, gravity of the offence, severity of punishment, in my opinion, no case for bail is made out. 10. Accordingly, the bail application is hereby rejected. 11. It is clarified that the observations made regarding the bail application is limited to the decision of the bail application and any observations made herein shall not effect the trial of the case. September 3, 2025 v.k.updh. BAIL No. 4013 of 2025 3 (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad