HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33082 of 2026 Court No. - 93 HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J. 1. This is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant. The first bail application being Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.4115 of 2026 was rejected by this court vide order dated 04.02.2026. 2. Heard Shri Rishabh Narain Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State-respondent and perused the record. 3. This second bail application has been moved on behalf of accused- applicant, Pratya Singh seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.232 of 2025 under Sections 109(1) and 3(5) BNS, P.S.- Khampar, District- Deoria, during pendency of trial. 4. Tersely, as per allegations contained in the F.I.R, two accused persons, the applicant and another accused, namely, Kishan Kashyap have caused firearm injury to the son of the informant Dilsher Ahmad. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that in the first information report no specific or distinct role of causing firearm injury to the injured has been assigned to the applicant. Role of the applicant was surfaced during the course of investigation on the basis of statement of the injured which has been recorded by the I.O. under Section 180 B.N.S.S. and no firearm was recovered in this incident. There was business transaction between the victim and father of the accused-applicant. He further submits that all the three witnesses, who are examined before the trial court have turned hostile. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the informant has not yet been examined and is presently residing outside the country. However, he assures the Court that the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rishabh Narain Singh, Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pratya Singh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) informant shall appear before the trial court and his statement shall be recorded. The applicant has no criminal history and he is jail since 04.12.2025. 6. Learned A.G.A. does not dispute that the accused-applicant has no criminal history. He, however, submits that although the injured witness and the other prosecution witnesses had supported the prosecution case before the Investigating Officer, they have subsequently turned hostile during the course of trial and have not supported the prosecution case before the trial court. 7. The accused-applicant is named in the FIR and, after investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted against him, upon which cognizance was taken and charges were subsequently framed. During the course of trial, the statements of prosecution witnesses Nos. 1, 2 and 3, namely Saleha Khatun, Zahid Ansari and Tazbun Nisha, respectively, have been recorded before the trial court. All three witnesses have turned hostile and have not supported the prosecution case either in their examination-in- chief or in their cross-examination. In particular, prosecution witness No. 2, who is stated to be the injured witness and to have sustained the firearm injury, stated in his examination-in-chief that he had sustained the firearm injury at the hands of two unknown boys. Thus, there appears to be a contradiction regarding the allegation that the accused-applicant had caused the firearm injury. It is further submitted that the accused- applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 04.12.2025 and keeping in view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering paragraph no.53 of Apex Court in case of Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement 2024 (SC) LawSuit 677, dictum of Apex Court in Union of India vs. K.A. Najeeb (2021) 3 SCC 713 & Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. (2022) 10 SCC 51 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that:- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not BAIL No. 33082 of 2026 2 seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the court concerned. (iv) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement of accused personally to explain circumstances appearing in the evidence against him. (v) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him strictly in accordance with law. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail by the trial court. 9. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. 10. The learned trial court is directed to proceed with the trial, as per law and try to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order by fixing short dates without granting unnecessary adjournment, if there is no legal impediment. October 1, 2026 Ankit. BAIL No. 33082 of 2026 3 (Santosh Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANKIT VISHWAKARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad