Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:27190 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3912 of 2025 Applicant :- Madhav Raj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Rama Kant Dixit,Ram Vishal Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State and perused the record. 3. This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.56 of 2025, under Sections 3/5/25 Arms Act, registered at P.S.-Baundi, District-Bahraich. 4. As per contents of First Information Report, incident is said to have taken place on 24.03.2025 when a police team acting upon an information provided, is said to have apprehended the applicant along with illegal arms and parts for its manufacturing, which are indicated in the FIR itself. 5. It has been submitted that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the charges levelled against him which would be evident from the fact that there is no independent witness of the alleged recovery from the applicant which even otherwise is said to have taken place on the basis of information supplied by the police informant. It is submitted that the procedure as required for purposes of recovery has also not been followed. It is submitted that previous criminal history of the applicant has been explained. 6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed bail application with the submission that recovery was videographed as indicated in the FIR itself which clearly establishes the allegation levelled against the applicant. It is however admitted that previous criminal history of the applicant has been explained. 7. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties, perusal of material available on record and prima facie subject to further evidence being led during trial, it appears that there is no independent witness of the alleged recovery process which pertains to manufacture of country made pistol. It is however admitted that previous history of the applicant has been explained 8. Looking to the nature of allegations levelled against the applicant and submission made in the bail application, without expressing any opinion on the merits of case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, particularly since no reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses has been alleged, prima facie, this Court finds, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 9. Accordingly bail application is allowed. 10. Let applicant, Madhav Raj 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) 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. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant 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. (iii) 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, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) 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. 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. Order Date :- 9.5.2025 Renu/- Digitally signed by :- RENU AGARWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench