HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4977 of 2026 Court No. - 70 HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J. 1. Affidavit of compliance filed on behalf of applicant in the Court today is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 3. By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 444 of 2025, under Section 109 of B.N.S. and Section 4/25 Arms Act, P.S. Kotwali Mau, District Mau, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that in the first information report the allegation of physical assault by knife upon the victim has been leveled against the applicant. He next submitted that the applicant is a student of Class-XII and he has not committed any offence and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to some ulterior motive. He further submitted that no incriminating article or material has been recovered either from the applicant or on his pointing out. He lastly submitted that the applicant, who is in jail since 25.12.2025 and has no criminal antecedents to his discredit is entitled to be enlarged on bail during pendency of the trial. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of informant, as well as learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. They have also placed reliance upon the report of CECT Thorax and statement of doctor. The C.T. Scan report suggested "Right hemo- Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Hari Bans Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Shailesh Kumar Yadav Shivansh Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) pneumothorax and atelectasis / consolidation posterior segment right upper lobe and right lower lobe; ICD tube in situ right side". Doctor Pradeep Kumar (E.M.O.), District Hospital, Mau in his statement has specifically stated that the injury sustained by the injured was fatal to life, and in view of the above, the accused-applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. After having heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant, as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record, as well as radiological report and the statement of doctor, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail during the trial, hence this bail application is rejected. April 21, 2026 Faridul BAIL No. 4977 of 2026 2 (Harvir Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- FAREEDUL HASAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad