Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:34708 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5110 of 2025 Applicant :- Suhail Khan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Raman Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and perused the record. This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No. 15 of 2025 under Section 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 341(1) of BNS Act & Section 66(C) of IT Act, Police Station Cyber Crime, District Bahraich. As per contents of FIR, allegation levelled against applicant is of fraudulent opening of various bank accounts for the purposes of extracting money from the persons in whose name bank accounts have been opened. The allegations levelled specifically is that an account by the name of Verma Traders was opened utilizing the documents of informant whereafter the informant was induced to sign various blank cheques which were utilized for withdrawal of money. It has been submitted by learned counsel for applicant that he has been falsely implicated in allegations leveled against him which would be evident from the fact that only general nature of allegations has been levelled with regard to opening of various bank accounts without indicating any specific name of any person in whose name fraudulent bank account has been operated. It is submitted that the allegations leveled clearly indicate improbability of charges. Learned counsel for the applicant seeks parity with the bail order of co-accused Siraj Ahmad, who has been granted bail vide order dated 29.5.2025 by coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4833 of 2025. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application, however, could not dispute the fact that it is a case of parity. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of material on record, prima facie subject to evidence led in trial, it appears that general nature of allegations has been leveled with regard to opening of bank accounts in names of other persons. The aspect of bank account opening in the name of Verma Traders by utilizing the documents of informant with his approval or otherwise would be subject matter of investigation which is still ongoing and in which applicant undertakes to cooperate. The applicant does not have any previous criminal history. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40 has specifically held that bail is to be a norm and an under-trial is not required to be in jail for ever pending trial. Considering the nature of the allegations levelled against the applicant, the submissions made in the bail application, the nature of accusation, the severity of punishment in case of conviction, and the nature of supporting evidence, particularly in the absence of any reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses, and further, as the applicant seeks parity with the co-accused Siraj Ahmad, who has already been granted bail, this Court is of the prima facie view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. Accordingly bail application is allowed. Let applicant Suhail Khan 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 269 BNS. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 BNSS 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 209 BNS. (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 351 BNSS. 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 :- 5.6.2025 Madhu D.R/P.S Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench