HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33726 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Amit Kumar Gaur, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arun Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.473 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109(1), 352 B.N.S., Police Station Kotwali, District Mainpuri, during the pendency of trial. 5. As per prosecution story, the applicant alongwith four other co-accused persons is stated to have fired indiscriminately at the injured person causing gun-shot injury to him on 04.07.2025 at about 8:00 a.m. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by more than four hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. There is only one gun-shot injury sustained by the injured person, but subsequently the injured person has assigned the role of causing gun-shot injury to the applicant only, which has been done after legal consultation. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the said fact also implies that the informant is not an eye-witness. The criminal history of Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amit Kumar Gaur Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Dilip Kumar Alias Dillu .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) twenty two cases assigned to the applicant stands explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 04.07.2025 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. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 9. The Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tewari vs. State of U.P. And Another, (2020) 11 SCC 648 has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail, if otherwise his case for bail is made out. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, 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. 11. Let the applicant- Dilip Kumar Alias Dillu, 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. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 13. 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. October 6, 2025 (Ravi Kant) BAIL No. 33726 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad