Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:24090 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3106 of 2025 Applicant :- Shakir Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Hemendra Pratap Singh,Anshu Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anand Pati Tiwari,G.A.,Shiv Karan Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Hemendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anand Pati Tiwari, learned counsel for the informant and Ms. Ifrah Islam, learned State Law Officer as well as perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.666 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 61(2) of BNS., Police Station Sikandrabad, District Bulandshahr, during the pendency of trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. It is next stated that the applicant is not named in the FIR. The name of the applicant has come up in the confessional statement of the co- accused person, which has no evidentiary value. 5. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. 6. The criminal history of five cases assigned to the applicant has been explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 29.08.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute the aforesaid facts. 8. In the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648, the Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused by itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail. 9. In light of the judgement of the Supreme Court passed in Niranjan Singh and another vs Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote and others AIR 1980 SC 785, this Court has avoided detailed examination of the evidence and elaborate documentation of the merits of the case as no party should have the impression that his case has been prejudiced. A prima facie satisfaction of case is needed but it is not the same as an exhaustive exploration of the merits in the order itself. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the settled law of the Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690 and Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. However, the case of the named accused Saleem is distinguished qua the applicant. The bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant- Shakir, who is involved in aforementioned 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 following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence. (ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 13. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 19.2.2025/Sumit S (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad