HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30304 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Syed Abbas Ali, Advocate holding brief of Sri Afzal Husain, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Deepak Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Sessions Trial No. 85 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 1033 of 2024, under Sections 352, 103(1) of BNS and Sections 4/25 of Arms Act, Police Station - Nandgram, District - Ghaziabad, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have assaulted and caused stabbed wound to the informant's brother in the night of 21.11.2024 at about 08:30 PM when he was sitting near fire outside his house. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case as he had given Rs.10,000/- to the deceased person. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by about five hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has also stated that the trial is moving at a snail's pace as no witness has been examined to date. The applicant is languishing in jail since 22.11.2024, having no criminal history to his credit. In case, the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Afzal Husain, Mohd Qasim Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rupesh .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P Through Its Principal Secretary (Home),U.P .....Opposite Party(s) applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial. 7. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the delay in lodging the FIR stands explained by the fact that the informant has rushed the deceased person to hospital whereby he expired and after his death, the FIR has been instituted in the same night of the incident, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the applicant is the sole accused person who had assaulted and caused stabbed wound to the deceased person resulting to his death coupled by the fact that the FIR was instituted within a reasonable time, I do not find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. 9. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. 10. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously, in view of the principle laid down in the recent judgements of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment. 11. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. October 9, 2025 Siddhant BAIL No. 30304 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad