HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30159 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri N.K. Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 228 of 2024, under Sections 105, 115(2), 352 B.N.S., Police Station- Ganjdundwara, District- Kasganj during pendency of the trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per the first information report, the applicant along with three named accused is alleged to have assaulted the informant, his brother, his father by lathi, danda and iron rod. The father of the informant died on his way to the hospital. The injuries received by the informant and his brother were simple in nature. According to the postmortem report of the deceased, four antemortem injuries were found. Injury no.1 was an incised wound on the top of the head, whereas other injuries were on other parts of the body. In the opinion of the doctor the cause of death is shock and haemorrhage as a result of antemortem injuries. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as a principal offender, who caused injury no.1 to the deceased Mahesh. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 25 of the bail application. Investigation has been completed. Charge-sheet has been filed. The applicant is in jail since 29.7.2024. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Nirbhay Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Narendra .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that the injuries received by the informant and his brother were simple in nature. According to the postmortem report of the deceased, four antemortem injuries were found. Injury no.1 was an incised wound on the top of the head, whereas other injuries were on other parts of the body. In the opinion of the doctor the cause of death is shock and haemorrhage as a result of antemortem injuries. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as a principal offender, who caused injury no.1 to the deceased. Further the applicant has presently remained confined for more than 14 months and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant, Narendra involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: i. the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court. 7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. October 9, 2025 S.S. BAIL No. 30159 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad