HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29941 of 2025 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Sanjeev Kumar Trivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sushil Kumar Shukla, learned State Law Officer, Sri Vasu Dev, Advocate holding brief of Sri Mukesh Kumar, learned counsel for the informant and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 257 of 2025, under Sections 303(3), 62, 105, 351(2) B.N.S., Police Station Tirva, District Kannauj, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the husband of the informant is stated to have gone to take care of maize crop as it was raining and found the applicant and other co-accused persons involved in stealing the said maize crop on 15.06.2025 at about 4 AM. The applicant and other co-accused were identified in torch light, whereby they are stated to have assaulted the husband of the informant and caused grievous injury leading to his death, whereby one of the accused person namely, Roshan Lal was apprehended by public at large at the spot with mobile of the deceased person. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed about 10 hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence. The applicant does not belong to the village of the informant. He was simply made an accused on the basis of the said statement Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sanjeev Kumar Trivedi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Amit Alias Murari .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) of the co-accused persons, which has no evidentiary value in the eye of law. There is no identification parade of the applicant and as such, it is a clear-cut case of false implication. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the injuries sustained by the deceased person indicate that he might have been assaulted by some hard and blunt object as the injury on occipital region is a lacerated wound and the place of occurrence being an agricultural field and there must be some weapon in the hand of either of the accused person, but the same has not been mentioned in the FIR. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 15.06.2025 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. Learned State Law Officer as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute the submissions made by the counsel for the applicant. 8. In the case of Thulia Kali vs The State of T.N. AIR 1973 SC 501, the Supreme Court has held that the First information report in a criminal case is an extremely vital and valuable piece of evidence for the purpose of corroborating the oral evidence adduced at the trial. The object of insisting upon prompt lodging of the report to the police in respect of commission of an offence is to obtain early information regarding the circumstances in which the crime was committed, the names of the actual culprits and the part played by them as well as the names of eye witnesses present at the scene of occurrence. Delay in lodging the first information report quite often results in embellishment which is a creature of afterthought. On account of delay the report not only gets bereft of the advantage of spontaneity danger creeps in of the introduction of coloured version, exaggerated account, or concocted story as a result of deliberation and consultation. 9. 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 lodging the first information report, there has been no weapon assigned to any of the accused persons 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. BAIL No. 29941 of 2025 2 10. Let the applicant- Amit Alias Murari 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 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 #Vik/- BAIL No. 29941 of 2025 3 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad