Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:20028 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3202 of 2025 Applicant :- Amit Alias Vikky Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sudarshan 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. 1081 of 2024, under Sections 309(4), 352, 351(2), 351(3), 317(2), 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station- Baradari, District- Bareilly during pendency of the trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report. The applicant along with another co-accused was arrested on 7.11.2024 in case crime no.- 0440 of 2024, under Section 109, 317(2) B.N.S. and 3/25 Arms Act, 1959 and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. False recovery of Rs.39,000/- has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. At this stage, except the confessional statement of the applicant there is no evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 10 of the bail application. The applicant is in jail since 13.11.2024. 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. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. At this stage, except the confessional statement of the applicant there is no evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Further the applicant has presently remained confined for almost three 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, Amit Alias Vikky 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 :- 11.2.2025 S.S. Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad