HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25210 of 2026 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard counsel for the applicant and Sri Ramesh Kumar Pandey, counsel for the informant as well as Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned AGA for the State- opposite party. Perused the material available on record. 2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 245 of 2026, under Sections 105, 351(3), 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station- Murad Nagar, District- Ghaziabad, during the pendency of the trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 27.5.2026, whereas the first information report was lodged on 31.5.2026 under Sections 103(1), 351(3), 3(5) B.N.S. The delay in lodging the first information report is fatal to the prosecution case. During investigation, section 103(1) BNS was deleted and section 105 BNS was added. As per the allegations contained in the first information report, the applicant along with four other accused allegedly assaulted the informant's son by lathis and dandas. The informant's son succumbed to his injuries while being taken to hospital. As per the post-mortem report, the deceased had sustained seven injuries, out of which injury no.1 was on the head region, whereas remaining injuries were on other parts of the body. In the opinion of the doctor, cause of death is coma due to antemortem head injury. Further, as per the statements of the son of the deceased, namely Ujjawal and the eye-witness namely Mohit Thakur, it was the co-accused Manish, who allegedly pushed the son of the informant during scuffle, as a result of which, he sustained Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Atul Tej Kulshrestha Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Abhishek Pandey, G.A., Ramesh Kumar Pandey Jauni .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) injuries and subsequently died. It is contended that the role of the applicant is distinguishable from that of co-accused Manish. At this stage there is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the offence. It is next contended that the co-accused Monika has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 15.9.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.30288 of 2026. Applicant claims parity. The applicant is in jail since 21.6.2026 having no criminal antecedents and in case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned AGA for the State has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that the first information report has been lodged belatedly. As per the post-mortem report, the deceased had sustained seven injuries, out of which injury no.1 was on the head region, whereas remaining injuries were on other parts of the body. In the opinion of the doctor, cause of death is coma due to antemortem head injury. Further, as per the statements of the son of the deceased, namely Ujjawal and the eye-witness namely Mohit Thakur, it was the co-accused Manish, who allegedly pushed the son of the informant during scuffle, as a result of which, he sustained injuries and subsequently died. At this stage there is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Further, the co-accused Monika has been granted bail by this Court. Moreover, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and has remained confined for more than three months and after submission of the charge sheet and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. 6. Let the applicant Jauni, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the conditions that he: (i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; BAIL No. 25210 of 2026 2 (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. September 24, 2026 Manish Kr BAIL No. 25210 of 2026 3 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad