DEEPAKversusSTATE OF U.P.

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
         CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16712 of 2026

Deepak
                                                             .....Applicant(s)
                                   Versus

State of U.P.
                                                                .....Opposite
                                                                      Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)                    :   Nagendra Pratap Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)               :   G.A.

Court No. - 72
                 HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State,
learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.

2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 259 of 2025, under Sections 109(1),
115(2), 352, 351(2), (3), (5) of the B.N.S., Police Station- Matsena,
District- Firozabad, during the pendency of the trial.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been
falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further contends
that in the statement of the injured, role of the applicant that has been
assigned is a general role and later on of catching hold the injured Jiledar.
The learned counsel contends that the head injury that has been caused to
Jiledar, has been specifically attributed to the co-accused, Pratap Singh.
The axe has been assigned to Pratap Singh, a lathi has been assigned to
Rajveer. The case of the applicant is distinguishable from that of the co-
accused Pratap Singh. The applicant is in jail since 04.04.2026. A charge
sheet has been submitted.

4. Learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for bail and
has contended that the applicant has been assigned the role of assaulting
the injured. The injured Jiledar has received grievous injuries which could
be called dangerous to life. The co-accused Pratap Singh had filed his bail
application No. 6808 of 2026 in which this Court vide order dated
07.5.2026 had called for a detailed counter affidavit. The learned counsel
for the informant contends that in view of the previous order passed by
                                                         BAIL No. 16712 of 2026
                                2


this Court, this application may also be deferred and heard together with
the earlier application.

5. The learned A.G.A. has supported the contentions of the learned
counsel for the informant and has further pointed out that the applicant
has a criminal history of one case.

6. The learned counsel for the applicant, rejoining the issue, contends that
the applicant was falsely implicated in the said case, however, was
exonerated during investigation.

7. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the
parties.

8. The applicant although named in the FIR, in the statement of the
injured witness Shivani, the specific role of assaulting the injured using an
axe and a lathi has been given to the accused Rajvir and Pratap Singh. A
general role has been assigned to the applicant and he has been specified
the role of catching hold the injured Jiledar while he was being assaulted
by the co-accused Rajvir. The applicant has properly explained his
criminal antecedents. His case is distinguishable from that of the co-
accused Rajvir and Pratap.

9. Taking into account the entire facts and circumstances of the case, a
prima facie case for bail is made out.

10. The bail application is allowed.

11. Let the applicant - Deepak, involved in the aforementioned crime be
released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable
sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court
concerned, subject to the following conditions:

i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

ii. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

iii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses
and co-operate in the trial.

iv. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the
trial Court, unless his personal appearance is exempted by the Court
                                                                                             BAIL No. 16712 of 2026
                                                                    3


                                    concerned.

                                    12. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the trial
                                    Court will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his/her bail.

                                    13. It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of
                                    computer generated copy of this order, downloaded from the official
                                    website of High Court Allahabad and verified by the concerned counsel
                                    with the undertaking that the certified copy will be filed within 15 days.

                                    14. It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release order to
                                    the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to
                                    ensure early release of the applicant.

                                    15. The observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the
                                    instant bail application and shall not be construed as an opinion on the
                                    merits of the case.



                                                                                       (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
                                    May 18, 2026
                                    Kushal




Digitally signed by :-
KUSHAL AGRAWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad