HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34784 of 2025 Court No. - 70 HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant; learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. 2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, D.K. Sharma Alias Devendra Kumar Sharma with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.196 of 2025, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the IPC, Police Station- Kotwali Hathras, District- Hathras, during pendency of trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the first information report. The incident is of 28.06.2019 while the first information report was lodged after the delay of about 6 years on 04.06.2025. The applicant is not named in the first information report. Co-accused Sarika Sharma, who was named in the first information report, has already been granted interim protection by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.06.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.13172 of 2025. The applicant is 78 years old person. He is only the Manager of the institution. It is not the responsibility of the applicant to verify the documents. It is responsibility of the Basic Shiksha Adhikari to verify the documents. The applicant is languishing in jail since 10.09.2025 having no criminal history. It is submitted that since the charge-sheet has already been submitted on 16.09.2025, therefore, there is no reasonable possibility of intimidating or pressurizing the prosecution witnesses and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arvind Kumar Tiwari, Vineet Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. D.K. Sharma Alias Devendra Kumar Sharma .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 4. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant but he could not dispute the above facts. 5. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, bail application is allowed. 6. Considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) 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 Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A I.P.C./269 B.N.S. (iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 B.N.S.S. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A I.P.C./209. B.N.S. (v) 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 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without BAIL No. 34784 of 2025 2 sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 7. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 8. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. (Santosh Rai,J.) October 9, 2025 Radhika BAIL No. 34784 of 2025 3 Digitally signed by :- RADHIKA VISHWAKARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad