Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:36388 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5626 of 2025 Applicant :- Rashid Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Uma Kant,Shrayansh Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in FIR/Case Crime No.161 of 2025, under Sections 310(2), 311, 317(3) B.N.S., Police Station- Phardhan, District- Lakhimpur Kheri. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. He next submits that the applicant was arrested and sent to jail on 08.05.2025 and there is no previous criminal history of the applicant. He next submits that identically situated co-accused- Sudheer Kashyap @ Mama has already been enlarged on bail vide order dated 10.06.2025 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.5227 of 2025 and he is seeking parity to the same. He next submits that the applicant has co-operated in the investigation proceedings and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings, thus submission is that he may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submitted that the applicant is involved in committing the offence, but he could not dispute the fact that identically situated co-accused- Sudheer Kashyap @ Mama has already been enlarged on bail. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant has on criminal history and is languishing in jail since 08.05.2025; identically situated co-accsued, namely, Sudheer Kashyap @ Mama has already been enlarged on bail; there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant so as to connect him with the offence coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. 6. 6. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. 7. Let the applicant- Rashid involved in the aforementioned 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:- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (ii) 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. He 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 (Now Section 269 BNS); (iii) 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. (Now Section 351 BNSS); and (iv) 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. (Now Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC (Now Section 209 BNS). 8. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. 9. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 24.6.2025 Anand/- Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench