HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32759 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Akhil Ranjan, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.122 of 2025, under Sections 109, 118(1), 115(2), 352, 351(3) B.N.S., Police Station- AIIMS, District- Gorakhpur, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have assaulted and caused injuries to the husband of the informant in the night of 23.4.2025 at about 08:30 p.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 more than five hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The matter is of sudden provocation. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the injuries were not found to be dangerous to the life of the injured person. Although one injury is incised wound on left side of neck of the injured person and underlying vessels were found ruptured and bleeding was present. The injured person was admitted in Medical College, Gorakhpur and intervention Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Akhil Ranjan Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Virendra Nishad .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) procedure was to be conducted to the victim. The victim left the hospital without informing the authorities against medical advice. The said fact stands mentioned in the medical report annexed as Annexure-6 to the affidavit filed with bail application. 7. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant has been explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 24.4.2025 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. 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 of 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, taking into consideration the delay of five hours in institution of FIR and the fact that injuries were not dangerous to the life of the victim and the matter is of sudden provocation, 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- Virendra 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. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. BAIL No. 32759 of 2025 2 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. September 23, 2025 Vikas Verma BAIL No. 32759 of 2025 3 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad