HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6401 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. 1. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the complainant is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and Sri D.K. Mishra, learned Counsel for the complainant. 3. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.32 of 2025, under Sections 109(1), 351(3), 103(1) of BNS, Police Station Cantt, District Faizabad/ Ayodhya. 4. In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that on various occasions threats were being issued for killing the brother and cousin brother of the informant and on 07.02.2025, it was seen that the co-accused Arpit Dubey alias Ankit, who was driving Mahindra Thar, and the applicant was sitting adjacent to him, hit the brothers with intention to kill them, which resulted into sustaining severe injuries. 5. In the light of the aforesaid allegations, the Counsel for the applicant argues that even in the FIR, no allegation was levelled against the applicant of having caused the offence in question as he was not even driving the vehicle in question. He further argues that the applicant was merely sitting in the vehicle and thus he cannot be implicated for the alleged offence. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajeev Mishra, Mool Shankar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Dinesh Kumar Mishra, Firoz Ahmad Khan Sunil Kumar Jaiswal .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) 6. Learned A.G.A. as well as the Counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail prayer. The Counsel for the informant argues that the co- accused Arpit has substantial criminal history and if the bail is granted to the present applicant, the case of the applicant may be distinguished from the other co-accused Arpit. 7. Considering the submissions made by the Counsel for the parties and on perusal of the FIR itself, prima facie, no allegation have been levelled against the applicant for the commission of the offence under Section 103(1) of the BNS and prima facie, there is no evidence against the applicant to implicate him coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is languishing in jail since 14.02.2025, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. It is clarified that the grant of bail to the present applicant would not be considered as a parity, if the bail of the co-accused is argued. 9. Let the applicant Sunil Kumar Jaiswal be released on bail in the abovesaid first information report number on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions: (a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings; (b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and (c) 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. October 30, 2025 akverma BAIL No. 6401 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench