HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30888 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Sanjeev Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.236 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 109(1), 115(2), 352, 351(2), 131 B.N.S., Police Station- Belipar, District- Gorakhpur, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant and other co-accused persons are stated to have assaulted and caused injuries to the wife of the informant with an intention to cause her death, thereby caused grievous injuries to her nose and eye on 26.7.2025 at about 06:30 a.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 two days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that there is cross- version to the instant case and FIR No.238 of 2025 was instituted from the side of applicant against the injured person and other family members, as such, there being cross-version it cannot be ascertained as to which party was the aggressor one. It was a free-fight between the parties. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sanjeev Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ravindra Nishad .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 7. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the injuries sustained by the injured person in the instant case were not dangerous to the life. There is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 29.7.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 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 fact that FIR is delayed by more than one and a half days and there being cross-version to the instant case, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima facie, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant- Ravindra Nishad, 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. 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 25, 2025 Vikas Verma BAIL No. 30888 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad