Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:116825 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4450 of 2025 Applicant :- Rajendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ankur Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Shri Ankur Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shashank Singh, Advocate, brief holder of learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record. 2. This bail application under Section 483 BNSS. has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant, Rajendra, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 0179 of 2024, under Sections 103 (1), 238 and added Section 3 (5) BNS, Police Station Mirapur, District Muzaffar Nagar. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused- applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this case crime number and is languishing in jail since 07.11.2024. He has no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is no allegation against the applicant in the FIR and the FIR was lodged after two days delay without giving any explanation for delay in lodging the FIR. The applicant has made accused in the present case on the basis of statement of informant and alleged CCTV footage. The alleged CCTV footage nowhere connects the applicant with the alleged offence. The post mortem examination report does not support the prosecution version. There is no independent witness of the alleged recovery of plastic packet and the chain of circumstantial evidence is not completed and nothing incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the applicant or on his pointing out. It is submitted that during trial the informant has not supported the FIR version and during cross examination P.W.2 and P.W. 3 have been turned hostile. Hence, bail has been prayed for. 4. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the first informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts. 5. Considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out. 6. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Let the accused-applicant, Rajendra, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions: i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence. ii. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity. iii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial. iv. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned. 8. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail. Order Date :- 17.7.2025 v.k.updh. Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad