HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8970 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. The accused-applicants seek bail in Case Crime No.0557 of 2025, under Section 318(4), 308(5), 351(3), 310(2), 352, 126(2), 111(2), 111(2)(ii), 317(2) and Section 317(3) BNS, Police Station Poorakalandar, District Ayodhya. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that during the subsistence of Case Crime No.557 of 2025, and after rejection of the applicant's bail application under Sections 318(4), 308(5), 351(3), 352, 310(2), 126(2), and 111(2) of the BNS Act, 2023 by the learned court below, the charge sheet has been filed with added sections. During investigation, Sections 317(2), 317(3), and 111(2)(ii) of the BNS were incorporated, pursuant to which the applicant again moved a bail application before the learned court below, which was also rejected. Hence, the present bail application has been filed before this Court. He submits that the alleged recovery of Rs.47,000/- from applicant No.1 and Rs.50,000/- from applicant No.2 is false, as there is no independent witness to support the said recovery. He further submits that the applicants have criminal history of four cases each which has been explained in paragraph 2 of the supplementary affidavit. The applicants is in jail since 6.8.2025. Learned counsel for the applicants submits the allegation levied in the present FIR is under Section 111 (2)(ii) and 317 (3) BNS Act of which there is no cogent evidence on record to suggest how the act of the present Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vaibhav Srivastava, Vishnu Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Gaurav Singh And Another .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) applicants comes under the definition of organized crime. He further seeks parity with the bail orders of Amresh Goswami as well as Neetu Singh who have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 11.09.2025 and 01.09.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.8686/2025 & 8226/2025. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicants and submits that applicant no.1 is named in the F.I.R. although applicant no.2 is not named. Applicants cannot claim parity with the bail order of Amresh Goswami (supra) who is not named in the F.I.R. In reply thereto, learned counsel for the applicant submits that another co- accused Neetu Singh (supra) has also been granted bail who was named in the F.I.R. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record. On due consideration of the facts that the applicants have explained the criminal history; the applicants are in jail since 06.08.2025 bail order of co- accused Neetu Singh (supra); and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicants on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicants, Gaurav Singh and Anjani Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, subject to their furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions: (i) The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicants shall not pressurize or intimidate any prosecution witness. (iii) The applicants 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 such person from disclosing the facts to the Court or to any police officer, or tamper with the evidence. (iv) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are BAIL No. 8970 of 2025 2 present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as an abuse of liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. (v) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A IPC (now Section 269 BNS). (vi) In case the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial, and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS) is issued, and the applicants fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC (now Section 209 BNS). September 18, 2025 Saurabh Yadav/- BAIL No. 8970 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench