HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29527 of 2026 Court No. - 93 HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 2. This second bail application has been moved on behalf of accused- applicant, Satyam Kharwar seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.399 of 2025 under Sections 109, 115(2), 352 and 351(3) BNS, P.S.- Kotwali, District- Ballia, during pendency of trial. First bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 25.2.2026 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.5975 of 2026. 3. Tersely, as per allegation contained in the FIR, the accused-applicant has caused sharp weapon injury to the injured Raju Kumar. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the accused-applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR and has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. Applicant is languishing in jail since 28.12.2025. It is submitted that either in the FIR or in the statement of the injured Raju Kumar, no specific allegation has been made against the accused-applicant and it is also not mentioned that what weapon was used to cause the injury. It is further submitted that charge has already been framed in the present case but no prosecution witnesses have been examined till date. It is argued that accused-applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit. Submission is that the conclusion of trial will take sufficiently long and there is no likelihood of his fleeing Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amrita Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Balendra Deo Misra, G.A., Ram Ji Singh Satyam Kharwar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA have opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant and submit that the accused- applicant is named in the FIR and specific and distinct role of the accused-applicant has been clearly assigned regarding causing sharp weapon injury to the injured Raju Kumar. It is further submitted that the injured has stated in his statement recorded before the IO that the accused-applicant Satyam has caused the injury with some pointed object and as per the medical report, the injury was dangerous to life. It is argued that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case as also the fact that applicant is named in the FIR and specific and distinct role of the accused-applicant has been assigned regarding causing injury to the injured Raju Kumar with sharp weapon, the injured has specifically stated in his statement that he was returning from fair and then the accused- applicant has caused the injury with some pointed object in his abdomen due to some previous enmity, in the injury report of the injured Raju Kumar, 'penetrating injury to abdomen (Stab injury by sharp object)' was noted as 'sutured periumbilical wound measuring 3 cm is present on the right side of umbilicus', as per the medical report, the injury was grievous in nature and the injured was hospitalized in the Division of Trauma Surgery, Department of General Surgery, Trauma Centre, BHU, Varanasi for treatment, the grounds as raised by learned counsel for the applicant have already been taken into consideration while disposing the first bail application, charge has already been framed in the present case but no prosecution witnesses have been examined till date, reasonable possibility of intimidating/pressurizing the prosecution witnesses and reasonable possibility to intervene the trial proceeding, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case and considering the submissions advanced, the role and involvement of applicant, nature of injury, seriousness of case, gravity of the accusation, this Court do not find any new cogent and BAIL No. 29527 of 2026 2 reliable grounds in order to consider the second bail application of applicant and enlarged him on bail in the aforesaid case, at this stage. 7. The second bail application is, accordingly, rejected. 8. However, the Trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial in accordance with law and make every endeavour to conclude the same expeditiously, preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, by fixing short dates, preferably two to three dates in a month. The Trial Court shall also endeavour to secure all possible means for recording the statements of the prosecution witnesses, particularly the informant and the injured witness, through video-conferencing/online mode, in accordance with the applicable rules and procedure, preferably within a period of two months. Unnecessary adjournments shall not be granted, unless warranted by any legal impediment. The Trial Court shall also be at liberty to take appropriate coercive measures including non-bailable warrant, in accordance with law, to secure the presence of the informant and the injured witness for recording their statements. 9. Registrar (Compliance) is directed to serve a copy of this order by FAX/e-mail to the court concerned through District and Sessions Judge concerned within 48 hours. September 8, 2026 RA BAIL No. 29527 of 2026 3 (Santosh Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAZIQ ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad