HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11209 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Supplementary Affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.70 of 2025, under Sections 303(2), 317(2), 317(4), 341(1) BNS, P.S. Aliganj, District Lucknow. Learned counsel for applicant submits that from the right pocket of the trouser of the applicant Rs.300/- and two keys of motor-cycle from the left pocket of the trouser have been shown to have been recovered from the applicant. There is no witeness of the recovery. Applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The offences are triable by magistrate. Applicant has explained the criminal history of 31 cases in the supplementary affidavit. Applicant claims parity with the bail order of co-accused Anas Khan who has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 29.7.2025 passed in Bail Application No. 6971 of 2025. Another co-accused persons namely Imran and Aamir have also been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 23.06.2025 & 26.06.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.5534/2025 & 5721/2025 respectively. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 08.02.2025. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer however could not Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Narvind Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Satyam Shukla .....Applicant(s) State Of Up Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) dispute that it is a case of parity. On due consideration to the bail order of co-accused Anas Khan, submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 08.02.2025, offences are triable by magistrate, applicant has explained the criminal history of 31 cases in the supplementary affidavit and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Satyam Shukla be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions: (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 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 Panel Code (now Section 269 of BNS). (vi) 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, BAIL No. 11209 of 2025 2 under Section 174-A of the Indian Panel Code (now Section 209 BNS). November 26, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S BAIL No. 11209 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench