BAIL/34912/2025 of RITIK Vs STATE OF U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34912 of 2025 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Sri Manish Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri B.P. Maurya, 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. 170 of 2025 under Sections 109(1), 115(2) BNS and sections 3/25/27 Arms Act, registered at Police Station Binauli, District Baghpat during pendency of the trial. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and he has been languishing in jail since 16.6.2025. It is further submitted that co-accused Saurabh and Nitish have already been granted bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 20.8.2025 and 19.9.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 26264 of 2025 and 29574 of 2025 respectively. It is further submitted that though the applicant has been assigned specific role of assault by fire arm, the injured has not received any injury which is dangerous to life . It is also submitted that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial. 4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submits that the injured has received gunshot injury on his right eye as a result of which, he is deprived of his right eye permanently.  5. Applicant has been assigned specific role of assault by fire arm as a result of which, the injured has received gunshot injury on his right eye and he has lost his right eye permanently, however the said injury has not been found to be dangerous to life. The applicant is in jail since 16.6.2025. 6. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manish Kumar Singh, Viveka Nand Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ritik .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 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. 7. Let the applicant Ritik involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with 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. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 9. 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. April 23, 2026 Madhurima BAIL No. 34912 of 2025 2 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)