HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29263 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Rajeev Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Buddhi Prakash, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned State Law Officer and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 08 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2), 110, 117(2) of BNS, Police Station Saurikh, District Kannauj, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant along with two other co-accused persons is stated to have assaulted and caused injury to the husband of the informant and when his mother rushed to save him, she was assaulted causing injuries to her life on 26.12.2024 at about 3 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. She has nothing to do with the said offence. The FIR is delayed by 12 days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has next stated that the injuries sustained by the injured person are not on vital part of the body, although certain injuries sustained by the nephew of the applicant are grievous in nature but the applicant has nothing to do with the said offence. There are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajeev Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Buddhi Prakash, G.A. Smt. Sushma Devi .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 7. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.07.2025 and she is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned State Law Officer have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the injury sustained by the husband of the informant was grievous in nature, as such the applicant 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 and taking into consideration the delay in institution of the FIR and there being general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons, 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- Smt. Sushma Devi, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on her 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 the 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 16, 2025 Sumit S BAIL No. 29263 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad