Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:24531 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37840 of 2024 Applicant :- Manish Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Vijay Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.N. Srivastava, learned AGA for the State. 3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 27 of 2024, under Sections 395, 412 IPC and 136 Electricity Act, Police Station Ratanpuri, District Muzaffar Nagar during pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, nobody was named in the FIR but during investigation on the basis of false allegation, applicant has been made accused in the present matter along with co-accused Pintu and co-accused Pintu has been released on bail by this Court and his bail order has been annexed at page-30 of the paper-book and on facts case of applicant is at par with him. 5. He further submits, however, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of nine other cases but his entire criminal history has been explained in the supplementary affidavit filed in support of instant bail application and merely due to previous criminal history of the applicant, he has been made accused in the present matter by the police during investigation. He further submits, co-accused Pintu was also having criminal history of 12 cases. 6. He further submits, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 22.03.2024 i.e. for last almost a year. 7. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 9. From the record, it reflects, initially FIR of the present case was lodged under Section 379 IPC and Section 136 of Electricity Act but during investigation case was converted under Sections 395, 412 IPC but it reflects, there is no cogent evidence of Dacoity against the applicant on record. 10. Record further suggests during investigation applicant has been made accused along with co-accused Pintu and co-accused Pintu has already been released on bail by this Court and on facts case of applicant is at par with him. 11. Further, however, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of nine other cases but his entire criminal history has been explained in the supplementary affidavit and considering the criminal history of the applicant, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that only due to his previous criminal history, applicant has been made accused in the present matter, cannot be ruled out. 12. Further, co-accused Pintu was also having criminal history of 12 cases. 13. Further, law is settled that if otherwise case of bail is made out then ordinarily merely on the basis of criminal history, bail application of an accused should not be withheld. 14. Further, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 22.03.2024 i.e. for last almost a year. 15. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 16. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 17. Let the applicant - Manish 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 the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 18. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 19. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 19.2.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad