HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39115 of 2025 Court No. - 65 (Sl. No. 65 out of 262) HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. As informed by learned State Law Officer, notice to the informant has been served on 6.3.2026 but none is present on behalf of the informant. 2. Heard Sri Shantanu Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned State Law Officer and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 189 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 115(2), 123, 70(2), 351(3) of BNS and Sections 5(G)/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Madhuban, District - Mau, during the pendency of trial. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused person, Chhotelal Rajbhar has already been enlarged on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.03.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 36427 of 2025. It is further submitted that since the case of the applicant is at par to the co-accused, who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. 5. Learned counsel has also stated that the applicant is languishing in jail since 25.07.2025, having no criminal history. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shantanu Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Arjun Kumar Gautam, Awaneesha Kumar, G.A., Narendra Singh Sandeep Rajbhar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) with trial. 6. The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned State Law Officer. However, the aforesaid factual aspects of parity to the co-accused and of no criminal history of the applicant, have not been disputed by him. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, evidence on record, pending trial and in the light of the judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 and the judgement passed by the Supreme Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 coupled with the judgement of Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity. 8. Let the applicant- Sandeep Rajbhar, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to verification of sureties, with the conditions that he shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as required. 9. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations herein shall not affect the trial on merits. April 2, 2026 Siddhant BAIL No. 39115 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad