HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3620 of 2025 Court No. - 21 HON'BLE MANJIVE SHUKLA, J. 1. Rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of the appellant is taken on record. 2. Heard Shri Anil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State. 3. In spite of notice of this criminal appeal having been served on Opposite Parties No. 2, 3 & 4, none is present on their behalf. 4. The captioned criminal appeal has been filed challenging therein, the judgment and order dated 06.10.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Faizabad/Ayodhya in Bail Application Computer Registration No. 2031 of 2025, Sajjan @ Sajan Vs. State of U.P.; arising out of Case Crime No. 233 of 2024, registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 307, 302, 504, 506 & 34 I.P.C. in Police Station - Raunahi, District - Ayodhya/Faizabad whereby, the bail application filed by the appellant had been rejected. 5. It has been contended on behalf of the appellant that in the crime in question, there are total seven accused out of which six accused had already been granted bail by this Court. It has further been contended that the co-accused, having identical role with the present appellant i.e. Neeraj, had already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 24.09.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 511 of 2025. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that since Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Anil Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Sajjan @ Sajan .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) co-accused having identical role in the crime in question had already been granted bail, the appellant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail. 7. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State has opposed prayer of the appellant for grant of bail but could not point out any distinguishable role of the appellant in the crime in question viz-a-viz the other co-accused who had already been granted bail by this Court. 8. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsels appearing for the parties and prima facie, I find that out of the seven accused of the crime in question, six had already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 19.09.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 3094 of 2024; 23.10.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 2958 of 2024; 25.09.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 2763 of 2024; 23.10.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 2772 of 2024; 24.09.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 511 of 2025 and 22.09.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 483 of 2025. I further find that this Court had already granted bail to co-accused, Neeraj, whose role is identical to that of the present appellant. 9. Having considered the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that keeping in view that all other co-accused had already been granted bail by this Court, the present appellant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail during trial. 10. In view of the aforesaid, this criminal appeal is hereby allowed. 11. Consequently, the bail application bearing number 01 of 2025 filed along with this appeal also stands allowed and the order dated 06.10.2025, passed by the learned Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Faizabad/Ayodhya in Bail Application Computer Registration No. 2031 of 2025, is set aside. 12. The trial court / competent court is hereby directed to enlarge the appellant, Sajjan @ Sajan on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The appellants shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial. CRLA No. 3620 of 2025 2 (ii) The appellants shall not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es). (iv) The appellants shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. (v) The appellants 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. (vi) The appellants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel and cooperate in the early disposal of the trial without seeking unnecessary adjournment. (vii) The appellants shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The appellants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.. 13. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 14. The observations made hereinabove by this Court are only for the purpose of disposal of this appeal-application for bail and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. December 5, 2025 Lokesh Kumar CRLA No. 3620 of 2025 3 (Manjive Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- LOKESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench