Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:12744 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1255 of 2025 Applicant :- Vindhyachal Sharma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Naveen Kumar Pandey,Shivam Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Santosh Kumar Gupta Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Santosh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 338 of 2024, under sections 326G of the B.N.S.,Police Station-Dhaneypur, District-Gonda. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He added that as per the prosecution story, the applicant including one another accused person,were seen to be flee away from the site of the occurrence, though, no identification parade has ever been conducted as per the procedure prescribed under the law. He submits that there is no clear picture of the CCTV Footage so as to identify the applicant. He added that the incident is of late night and as per the prosecution story, after the buses were set ablaze,the informant came out from the house and he alleged that he identified the persons, who had set ablaze the vehicles from their back side. He submits that the story of the prosecution is highly doubtful and infact the applicant was not involved in committing the offence and due to some animosity, his name has been placed in the first information report. He next submits that the applicant is cooperating in the investigation proceedings and he will never abscond from the trial proceedings as well. Further submission is that the applicant has four cases criminal history, which has been explained and he is languishing in jail since 09-01-2025 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Per contra, Sri Santosh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the complainant has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant was identified by the informant at the place of occurrence. He added that the nature of offence is very serious as the school buses were set ablaze by the applicant and grave harm is caused to the informant. He next added that since the applicant and the other co-accused belongs to the same village, therefore, there was no hardship to identify the applicant. He submits that the applicant has four cases criminal history and as such, he is not entitled for any relief. Learned AGA appearing for the State has also supported the version of the learned counsel for the complainant and submits that the applicant is named in the first information report and there are serious allegations against him and as such, he is not entitled for bail. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that no identification parade could be conducted so as to identify the applicant. It has been noticed by this court that the applicant had been identified by the informant from the back side and it is an admitted fact that the incident is of the late night, which seems to be improbable. Further the applicant has explained four cases criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 09-01-2025 coupled with the fact that he has undertaken that if he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant-Vindhyachal Sharma, involved in the aforementioned 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, with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) 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. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) 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.; and (4) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 3.3.2025 AKS Digitally signed by :- ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench