HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33525 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Sri B.K. Pandey, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the informant. The same is taken on record. 2. Heard counsel for the applicant, counsel for the informant and Sri Shashank Shekhar Pandey, learned AGA for the State-opposite party. Perused the material available on record. 3. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 276 of 2025, under Sections 281, 125(A), 125(B), 105, 61(2) B.N.S., Police Station- Naini, District- Prayagraj, during the pendency of the trial. 4. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the present case. At the time of alleged incident the car was driven by co-accused Navyansh Pandey. The applicant was sitting in the said vehicle. As per the CCTV footage and the statement of the injured Aditya Chauhan, the role of instigation has been assigned to the applicant. The case of the applicant is clearly distinguishable from that of co-accused Navyansh Pandey. It is next contended that the applicant is a student of B.Tech third year and his pursuing his course at United Institute of Technology, Prayagraj. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and his future would be jeopardized due to false implication in the present case. The applicant is in jail since 30.8.2025 and in case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 5. Learned AGA and counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dharmendra Singh, Sanraj Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Saket Singh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) record. 6. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not named in the first information report; at the time of alleged incident the car was driven by co- accused Navyansh Pandey; the applicant was sitting in the said vehicle. Further, as per the CCTV footage and the statement of the injured Aditya Chauhan, the role of instigation has been assigned to the applicant. Moreover, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and has remained confined for more than one month 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. 7. Let the applicant Saket Singh, 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; (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. October 10, 2025 Manish Kr BAIL No. 33525 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad