BAIL/33994/2026 of SATISH JAYSAVAL Vs STATE OF U.P. on 22 September 2026

1. Heard Sri Prateek Srivastava, learned counsel for accused applicant, Sri Akhilesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for State.

2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant/ accused- Satish Jayswal to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 34 of 2026, under Sections 115(2), 351(2), 352, 109 BNS, P.S.- Chakarghatta, District- Chandauli, during the pendency of trial.

3. It is the contention of learned counsel for applicant that the accused applicant has been falsely implicated in the FIR 03.07.2026 lodged by Gopal, son of injured Ram Janam. The allegation in the FIR is that on 03.07.2026 at about 13:30 hrs three persons including the accused/applicant were on vehicle Maruti Brezza and with the intention to commit murder, they hit the injured by the vehicle. Due to which he suffered injuries. It is the contention of learned counsel that the accused/applicant is shown as driver of the car. The co-accused has already been granted bail. The injury report of the injured shows that the injured has been admitted in the hospital Swashasi Rajya Chikitsa Mahavidyalaya, Sonbhadra with the history of road traffic accident having chest pain, lower leg pain, right hand swelling and forearm pain. On the very next day, he was discharged. The general condition was found to be good. It is further contended that later on, a subsequent medical report has been obtained on 07.07.2026, which shows that the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Hariom Awasthi, Prateek Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Akhilesh Kumar Yadav, G.A. Satish Jaysaval .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s)

injured sustained four injuries, which came to be the facture of third rib. The injured is relative of accused/applicant. He is uncle and there is dispute between the parties. Initially the FIR has been lodged by the accused/applicant and in counter blast the present FIR has been lodged. The applicant has been falsely implicated. The accused/applicant has criminal history of two cases, wherein in one case he is on bail and in another case he has been released on notice under Section 35(3) BNSS. The accused applicant is languishing in jail since 21.08.2026. He seeks to be enlarged on bail.

4. Learned A.G.A. for State and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the grievous injuries, which is fatal to life has been caused to the injured. The applicant is driver of the car, hence submits that the bail application be rejected.

5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. Considering prima faice two inconsistent medico legal examination reports and the matter of road accident, the accused/applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

7. Hence, without touching merit of the case, the bail application is allowed.

8. The accused/applicant 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 court concerned in view of observation made by the Supreme Court in its dictums of Girish Gandhi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh [(2024) 10 SCC 674] and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in re [(2024)10SCC 685].

9. The accused-applicant shall cooperate in judicial process for fair and speedy disposal. September 23, 2026 Abhishek Sri. BAIL No. 33994 of 2026 2 (Avnish Saxena,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK RANJAN SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad