Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:10085 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47270 of 2024 Applicant :- Vikrant Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant bail application, under Section 483 B.N.S.S., has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 188 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 333, 109(1) B.N.S., and Section 3/25/27 Arms Act, Police Station- Jansath, District- Muzaffar Nagar during pendency of the trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The name of the applicant was disclosed by the two injured. As per the medical report of the injured persons they received single injury. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The role of firing has been assigned to the co-accused Aryan and Hariom. It is next contended that the other named co-accused Golu has been granted bail by this court vide order dated 11.12.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 43452 of 2024. The applicant does not have any criminal history and is in jail since 1.9.2024. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned A.G.A. has 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. The name of the applicant was disclosed by the two injured. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The role of firing has been assigned to the co-accused Aryan and Hariom. The other named co-accused Golu has been granted bail by this court. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Further the applicant has presently remained confined for more than four 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. 6. Let the applicant, Vikrant involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two 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. 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 :- 21.1.2025 S.S. Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad