HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6466 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. It is alleged in the prosecution case that the applicant, in connivance with his wife, contacted the informant and identified himself as Registrar in the High Court and demanded extortion on the ground that he would harm his career prospects if the extortion amount was not paid. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The prosecution story is highly improbable. There is no independent witness of the said incident. The sole witness of the fact i.e. complainant has already been examined before the trial court and during cross-examination, he has not supported the prosecution case. The statement of the complainant recorded before the trial court is on record. 4. He further submits that applicant has criminal history of 14 cases which has been explained in paragraph-22 of the bail application. He further submits that the co-accused person (wife of the applicant) namely Sarita Mishra has been granted bail by a co-ordinate bench of this court in Criminal Misc Bail Application No. 4515 of 2025, vide orders dated 23.05.2025. He seeks parity with the bail order of the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dhirendra Kumar Mishra, Mukesh Kumar, Pramod Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s): G.A. Arun Kumar Mishra .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) said co-accused. 5. 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. 6. Learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail, but he could not dispute that it is a case of parity. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the period for which applicant is in jail since 13.04.2025; the fact that applicant has explained criminal history of 14 cases in paragraph 22 of the bail application; the fact that the complainant has been examined before the trial court and during his cross-examination, he has not supported the prosecution case, the fact that co-accused Sarita Mishra has been granted bail 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. 8. Let the applicant Arun Kumar Mishra, involved in Case Crime No. 291 of 2025, under sections 308(5), 351(2) B.N.S, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Sultanpur, 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 will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) 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. (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail BAIL No. 6466 of 2025 2 and pass orders in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A I.P.C. (now 269 BNS) (vi) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A I.P.C. (now 209 BNS). 9. The application is allowed on the ground of parity. November 7, 2025 DiVYa BAIL No. 6466 of 2025 3 (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