HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11037 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 2. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 12.09.2025, at about 13:28 Hours, the accused persons came at the store/shop of the complainant to purchase tiles. Out of two accused persons, one sat with the father of the complainant near the counter and the second accused person sat in front of the counter. On getting a chance, one of the accused stole 80,000/- Rupees from the counter of the complainant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The recovery of Rs. 24,000/- and a mobile phone from the possession of the applicant is false. There is no independent witness of the said recovery. The applicant has criminal history of one case, which has been explained in paragraph- 18 of the bail application and he is languishing in jail since 14.09.2025. He further submits that chargesheet has been filed in the present case. The offences are triable by the Magistrate and is punishable for a maximum period of 7 years. 4. 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. 5. 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. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, as also the period for which the applicant is in jail i.e. since Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Firoz Ahmad Khan Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Asharf .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko .....Opposite Party(s) 14.09.2025; as also the fact that the applicant has explained criminal history of one case in paragraph-18 of the bail application; the fact that there is no independent witness to the said recovery; the fact that offences are punishable upto a maximum period of 7 years; the fact that chargesheet has been filed; 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. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant Asharf involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 708 of 2025, Under Sections- 305(a), 317(2) B.N.S., Police Station- Kotwali Akbarpur, District- Ambedkar Nagar, 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. 9. 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. 10. 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 19, 2025 DiVYa BAIL No. 11037 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench