HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30350 of 2026 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed by the applicant is taken on record. 2. However, alongwith the instant bail application free true copy of the bail rejection order passed by the court concerned has not been annexed but considering the averment made in the supplementary affidavit dated 14.09.2026, the instant application is being heard. 3. Heard Sri S.D. Singh Jadaun, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajiv Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State. 4. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.200 of 2026, under Sections 103(2), 191(2), 352 BNS, Police Station Shahpur, District Gorakhpur, during pendency of the trial. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however applicant is named in the FIR and according to the FIR on the date of incident in a marriage function suddenly dispute arose between applicant and deceased and thereafter he by causing injury to him through kada (bracelet) committed his murder but admittedly informant of the case was not the eye-witness. 6. He further argued, however there are some eye-witnesses who also disclosed the name of applicant and reiterated the version of the FIR but from the statements of some other eye-witnesses it reflect, there is video Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Satya Dheer Singh Jadaun, Shubham Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pratap Kumar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) clip and in the video clip some persons were seen while they were making assault upon the deceased and these witnesses after perusing the video clip did not disclose the name of applicant and this fact again suggests, he has been falsely made accused in the present matter. 7. He further argued, even considering the FIR and statements of the witnesses it could not be reflected that applicant was having any intention to cause death of the deceased. 8. He further argued, applicant is not having any other criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 10.05.2026. 9. Per contra, learned AGA however opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. However, applicant is named in the FIR and according to the FIR in a marriage function on a sudden dispute applicant made assault upon the deceased through his bracelet due to which he sustained injuries and died but informant of the case was not the eye-witness. 12. Further, however there are number of eye-witnesses and they also reiterated the version of the FIR but considering the prosecution story this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that even if the prosecution story is accepted then also it cannot be said that applicant was having any intention to cause death of the deceased. 13. Further, even considering facts, it reflects, incident occurred suddenly without any premeditation in heat of passion. 14. Further, even from the statements of informant and other witnesses it also reflect, there is also one video clip of the incident and from the clip it reflects, some persons were making assault upon the deceased but none of the witnesses after perusing the clip disclosed the name of applicant alongwith other accused who were visible in the video clip, therefore BAIL No. 30350 of 2026 2 prima facie it reflects, from the video clip it could not be reflected that applicant was also making assault upon the deceased alongwith others. 15. Further, applicant is not having any other criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 10.05.2026. 16. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 17. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 18. Let the applicant - Pratap Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 19. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 20. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. September 16, 2026 Shahroz BAIL No. 30350 of 2026 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAHROJ ALAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad