Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:35067 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5206 of 2025 Applicant :- Shiv Kumar @ Nanake Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. /Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Vedika Dwivedi,Himanshu Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and perused the record. 2. This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.218 of 2024, under Sections 303(2), 316(5), 61(2) BNS, Section 26 Indian Forest Act & Sections 27, 29, 31, 51 of Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, registered at Police Station Tulsipur, District Balrampur. 3. As per contents of FIR, incident is said to have taken place on 10.10.2024 at about 07.30 P.M. when Forest Guard acting upon information allegedly recovered illegally cut trees which were being stored for purposes of transportation. 4. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is an innocent person, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is in jail since 25.04.2025. It would be evident from the fact that applicant is neither named in the FIR nor has any allegation been levelled against him but his involvement has been alleged on the basis of telephonic conversation. 5. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant's criminal history of 14 cases has been mentioned in para 19 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, in one case, he has been granted bail; in four cases, he did not receive any notice; in one case, he is not named and in rest of the eight cases, penalty has been imposed upon him. He further submits that co-accused Rakesh Pathak has already been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 27.05.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4641 of 2025. Investigation is still going on and he undertakes to cooperate with the same. In these circumstances, the applicant is also entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer of applicant but he does not dispute this fact that the co-accused- Rakesh Pathak having identical role has already been enlarged on bail. 7. Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record, contents of the F.I.R., other relevant documents, it appears that applicant has neither been named in the FIR nor any allegation has been levelled against him; investigation with regard to his complicity still ongoing, in which, he undertakes to cooperate with the trial; previous criminal history of the applicant has already been explained in the affidavit and bail order of the co-accused, Rakesh Pathak, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant- Shiv Kumar @ Nanake, 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: (i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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. (iv) 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 IPC. (v) 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., may be issued and if 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 IPC. (vi) 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. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Order Date :- 9.6.2025 Preeti. Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench