HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28503 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Arvind Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Abhishek Kumar Saroj, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Amit Kumar, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 221 of 2025, under Sections 191(3), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 109 B.N.S., Police Station- Rasara, District- Ballia, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant and other co-accused persons are stated to have caused injuries to the brother of the informant on 13.6.2025 at about 07:00 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. The FIR is delayed by about twenty two hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the role of firing at the injured person has been assigned to co-accused person Prince Singh and the said gunshot injury is stated to have hit to his leg, which is not a vital organ. There is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arvind Kumar Maurya, Om Prakash Verma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Abhishek Kumar Saroj, G.A., Nagendra Bahadur Singh, Rohit Kumar Singh Akash Rajbhar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) languishing in jail since 7.7.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the delay in institution of FIR has been explained as the injured person was first rushed to primary health centre thereupon to District Hospital and from there he was referred to BHU Medical College, Varanasi, as such, the FIR could not be instituted in the night itself. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the delay in institution of FIR coupled with the fact that the role of causing gunshot injury to the injured has been assigned to co-accused person Prince Singh, 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- Akash Rajbhar, 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. 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 10, 2025 Vikas Verma BAIL No. 28503 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad