HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42124 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Sri A.Z. Khan, learned counsel for the applicant who has filed supplementary affidavit which is taken on record, Sri B.P. Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record. 2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 142 of 2024 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 307, 302 IPC registered at Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Saharanpur during pendency of the trial. 3. At the very outset, learned A.G.A. states that notice has been served upon the first informant. 4. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and as per the FIR, co- accused Anas is said to have given a stab wound to the deceased whereas the applicant has been assigned the role of assault by iron rod. However, the injured eye witness Mijan has stated that applicant was armed with iron wheel (chakri) and three other accused persons were armed with lathi. As per the postmortem report of the deceased, multiple abrasions have been found on various parts of his head and one stitch wound has also been found on his abdomen and the cause of his death is trauma due to ante mortem injuries. It is further submitted that applicant is languishing in jail for the last two and a half years i.e. 30.3.2024 and the trial is not likely to conclude in near future. It is further submitted that co- Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : A.Z.Khan Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sameer .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) accused Anas has been declared juvenile and has been granted bail. It is also submitted that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. 5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submits that applicant has been assigned the role of assault by iron rod in the FIR and, during investigation, the injured eye witness Mijan has stated that applicant was armed with iron wheel and other accused persons were assigned the role of assault by lathi and the cause of death of the deceased Adnan has been shown as shock and hemorrhage due to ante mortem injuries. It is further submitted by him that death of the deceased has resulted due to all the injuries caused and not a particular injury of stab wound. 6. As per the FIR, co-accused Anas is said to have given a stab wound to the deceased Adnan whereas the applicant and other accused persons are said to have assaulted the deceased and the injured by iron rod. However, during investigation, the injured Mijan has stated before the Investigating Officer that the applicant was armed with iron wheel and rest of the accused persons Irshad, Chand and Sameel were armed with lathi. The postmortem report of the deceased shows multiple injuries on his head and one stitch wound on his abdomen apart from multiple abrasions on shoulder and other non-vital parts. There appears to be contradictions in the version of the FIR as well as in the statement of the injured witnesses regarding the weapon assigned to the applicant. During investigation, other accused persons Irshad, Chand and Sameel have been exonerated and their names do not find mention in the chargesheet. Applicant has criminal history of one case and he has been languishing in jail since 30.3.2024. 7. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail. Hence, the present bail application is ALLOWED. 8. Let the applicant Sameer involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with BAIL No. 42124 of 2025 2 two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) 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 under Section 351 of B.N.S.S. (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. 9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 10. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order. 11. Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of one year. September 17, 2026 Madhurima BAIL No. 42124 of 2025 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHURIMA GARG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad