HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11842 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record. The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.240 of 2025, under Section 2(b)(i), 2(b) (xi), 3 of UP Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, Police Station Musafirkhana, District Amethi, U.P. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the gang chart, five cases have been shown against the applicant. In that cases, the applicant has been enlarged on bail. The bail orders are on record as Annexures-3 to 7 to the bail application. Apart from the said cases, there is no other case pending against the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 10.10.2025. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the co-accused Sandeep Yadav has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 10.11.2025 passed in criminal misc. bail application No.10279 of 2025, copy of bail order is on record as annexure no.8 of the bail application. Learned counsel for the applicant seeks parity with the order of the co-accused. It is also submitted that the applicant is ready to furnish an undertaking in terms of requirement of Section 19(4)(b) of U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but has not disputed the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant. On due consideration to the bail order of co-accused Sandeep Yadva; the fact that in the cases mentioned in the gang chart, he has been enlarged on bail and the applicant is languishing in jail since 10.10.2025, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail on the ground of parity. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amit Chaudhary Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Lucky Yadav .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Accordingly, the bail application is allowed on the ground of parity. Let the applicant Lucky Yadav, involved in the aforesaid case crime number 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) 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. (iv) 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. 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. (v) The applicant shall submit an undertaking on affidavit in terms of Section 19 (4) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 that he will not indulge in any case for or misuse the liberty of bail. (vi) 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 of the Indian Penal Code (Now Section 269 of BNS). (vii) 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, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC (now Section 209 of BNS). It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial. December 2, 2025 Renu/- BAIL No. 11842 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RENU AGARWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench