HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28325 of 2025 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Deepak Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 424 of 2025, under Sections 124(1), 351(3), 352 of BNS, Police Station Kotwali, District Maharajganj, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, several children were playing football in the vicinity of the house of the informant whereby ball went to the shop of the applicant, who is a goldsmith. The applicant is stated to have refused to return the said ball. On being asked to return the ball, the applicant is stated to have thrown acid on them thereby causing acid burn injury to three persons in all and one of the boy is stated to have sustained injury on his eye. 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. 6. Learned counsel has next stated that the injuries sustained by two persons are simple in nature and they are old contusions which do not corroborate with the incident. Even the boy Divyansh Nayak was examined and no injury was observed on his body which falsifies the fact Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Deepak Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rahul Nikam .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) that acid burn injury has been caused to his eye, as such the complete prosecution story stands falsified. 7. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 01.08.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 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 said discrepancy in the injury report to the FIR, 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- Rahul Nikam, 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 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 9, 2025 Sumit S BAIL No. 28325 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad