HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11269 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. Accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 10 of 2025 under Sections 319(2), 336(3), 238(c) BNS & 66(C), 66(D) I.T. Act, P.S.-Cyber Crime, District-Ayodhya (Faizabad). It is alleged in the prosecution case that some unknown persons prepared a fake Facebook I.D. in the name of Gaurav Dayal, Commissioner, Ayodhya Division, Ayodhya. It is submitted that Rahul Khan in his confessional statement has stated that he has purchased a SIM bearing No. 7340227367 which was sold to Faizal Khan. Faizal Khan in his statement has stated that he given that SIM to one Nasir. Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the investigation is malicious. Applicant has falsely been implicated in the instant case by the Investigating Officer as extract of C.D.R. No. 5, which is on record shows that I.O. on subsequent statement given by the co-accused Faizal has made the applicant accused in this case. Apart from this, there is no scientific material to show that the applicant committed any offence or he is involved in this crime. Applicant has criminal history of one case, which has been explained in para 29 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Karunesh Singh, Rinki Devi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Taareef @ Tarri .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant. Considered the aforesaid and perused the record. On due consideration of the facts that applicant is languishing in jail since 07.08.2025, alleged offences are triable my Magistrate, charge sheet has been filed so also the statements of prosecution witnesses, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant-Taareef @ Tarri involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court. Any other condition(s) which the trial court/concerned court may deem fit and proper, in the circumstances of the case, may also be imposed. 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. November 27, 2025 Vinay/- BAIL No. 11269 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench