Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:20810 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46903 of 2024 Applicant :- Nitin Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Pal,Anvir Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Heard counsel for the applicant, Shri Mukesh Kumar Pandey, counsel for the informant and learned AGA for the State-opposite party. Perused the record. 2. The instant bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 216 of 2024, under Sections 309(6), 317(2) of B.N.S., Police Station Sikandara, District Kanpur Dehat, during the pendency of the trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report. The applicant was arrested after six days of the alleged incident and has been falsely implicated in the present case. False recovery of Rs.71300/- and a mobile phone has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. No identification parade was conducted by the police authorities. At this stage, there is no credible evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The applicant is in jail since 02.11.2024 having no criminal antecedents and in case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned AGA and counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. 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. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. No identification parade was conducted by the police authorities. At this stage, there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Further, the applicant has remained confined for more than three months and after submission of the charge-sheet 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. 6. Let the applicant Nitin Kumar, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his 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. 7. 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 :- 13.2.2025 Manish Kr Digitally signed by :- MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad