HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6032 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the offence is triable by the Magistrate. The alleged recovery of 15 tablets of Trika 0.25 gram and one mobile phone and Rs. 270 cash is false. There is no independent witness of the said recovery. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no other case registered against the applicant. The applicant undertakes to co-operate in the investigation and he is languishing in jail since 22.05.2025. 3. He further submits that the co-accused persons namely Sandeep and Laxman Yadav have been granted bail by a co-ordinate bench of this court in Criminal Misc Bail Application No. 8343 of 2024 and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8810 of 2025, vide orders dated 06.11.2025 and 23.09.2025 respectively. He seeks parity with the bail order of the said co-accused. 4. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. 5. Learned A.G.A.has opposed the prayer for bail, but he could not dispute that it is a case of parity. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the fact that applicant has explained criminal history of 34 cases in paragraph-24 of the bail application and paragraph- 18 of the rejoinder affidavit, the fact that co-accused persons namely Sandeep and Laxman Yadav have been granted bail; the fact that the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Santosh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Daya Shankar Bharti .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) applicant is languishing in jail since 22.05.2025, he seeks parity with the bail orders of co-accused Sandeep and Laxman Yadav and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. 7. The application is allowed on the ground of parity. 8. Let the applicant Daya Shankar Bharti, involved in Case Crime No. 107 of 2025, under sections 303(2), 317(2), 123 of B.N.S, P.S. Kotwali Cantt, District Ayodhya, 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 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. 9. 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 17, 2025 DiVYa BAIL No. 6032 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench