Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:31820 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38291 of 2024 Applicant :- Abdul Rajjak Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar,Vinod Kumar Tirpathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit, filed by the counsel for the applicant, is taken on record. 2. Heard learned Counsel for the applicant, Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The instant bail application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C., has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 336 of 2024, under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 112(2), 336(2) B.N.S., Police Station- Sector-24 Noida, District- G.B. Nagar during pendency of the trial. 4. The brief facts of the case is that during patrolling duty, the police officers stopped a white creta car which was running without number plate. The police personnel arrested the applicant and other co-accused person and recovered 17 cars of different company, 2 key-making tabs, 2 tab chargers, 2 coupler data, 3 car locks(ignition switch), 7 remote keys, 26 ordinary keys, 21 packets of sensor chip etc. 5. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. No such incident had occurred. Recovery is forged and planted. There is no independent witness to the recovery. Further, identically placed co-accused Asif @ Patu has been granted bail by this Court vide order 22.11.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.40587 of 2024. The applicant claims parity. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 3 of the supplementary affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 1.8.2024. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 7. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that there is no independent witness to the recovery. Identically placed co-accused Asif @ Patu has been granted bail by this Court. At this stage, there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Further the applicant has presently remained confined for more than seven months 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 intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 7. Let the applicant, Abdul Rajjak involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: i. the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court. 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. Order Date :- 5.3.2025 S.S. Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad