HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30639 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR SINGH, J. 1-Heard Mr. Karunesh Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State. 2-By means of this bail application, applicant Dilip Yadav, who is involved in Case Crime No. 359 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3), 109, 74 of B.N.S., Police Station Chauri Chaura, District Gorakhpur seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial. 3-It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that:- i-With regard to an incident which took place on 25.06.2025, first information reports were lodged from both the sides. ii-From the side of the complainant of this case, namely, Vakil Gupta, a first information report was lodged on 26.06.2025 at Case Crime No. 0359 of 2025 for the offence under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3), 109, 74 of BNS, Police Station Chauri Chaura, District Gorakhpur against five accused persons, namely, Dilip Yadav (applicant), Vinod Yadav, Mukesh Yadav, Ashish Yadav, Vinod Kannaujia and 7-8 unknown persons, in which it is alleged that two persons have received injuries. The injured Sanjay Gupta has received one head injury whereas another injured/complainant Vakil Gupta has received one injury on his upper lip. iii-From the side of the applicant, a first information report was lodged on 10.07.2025 at Case Crime No. 0384 of 2025, under Sections Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Karunesh Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Dilip Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 191(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3), 110 of BNS, Police Station Chauri Chaura, District Gorakhpur against three accused persons, namely, Vakil Gupta (complainant of this case), Sanjay Gupta (injured of this case) and Ram Kripal Gupta. It is also submitted that from the side of the applicant, four persons have received injuries. The injured Vinod Kannaujia has received one injury in the nature of contused swelling. The injured Mukesh has received two injuries. The injury no. 1 is in the nature of lacerated wound on the top of the head and injury no. 2 in the nature of lacerated wound on below left elbow joint. The injured Dilip Yadav has received two injuries in the nature of lacerated wound on middle and right fingers of left hand and injured Vinod Yadav has received one injury in the nature of contused swelling on his right palm. iv-It is also pointed out that from the side of the applicant, all the accused persons who are named in the F.I.R. dated 26.06.2025 have been arrested and are in jail whereas none of the accused who are named in the F.I.R. dated 10.01.2025 lodged from the side of the applicant have been arrested. There is no explanation of injury received by the four persons from the side of the applicant. v-The applicant has a criminal history of four criminal cases, which have been explained in paragraph no. 4 of the supplementary affidavit dated 03.09.2025. vi-There is no chance of the applicant fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. vii-On the strength of aforesaid facts and submissions, lastly it is submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 27.06.2025 and in case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate with the trial. 4-Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the first informant opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant but do not dispute the above factual aspect of the matter as argued on behalf of the applicant. 5-Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that it is not in dispute that both sides BAIL No. 30639 of 2025 2 lodged F.I.Rs. against each other. Four persons have received injuries from the side of the applicant. The applicant is also one of the injured and two persons have received injuries from the complainant's side. At this stage, it cannot be ascertained as to which side was the aggressor in the incident in question. 6-Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, gravity of offence and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that in the light of injuries received by applicant in the said incident, he has made out a case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed. 7-Let the applicant Dilip Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable. (ii) That the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity. (iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned. 8-In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, it is open for the complainant/ prosecution to move an appropriate application for cancellation of bail of the applicant before the concerned Court. September 9, 2025 Saurabh BAIL No. 30639 of 2025 3 (Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SAURABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad