HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6526 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. Heard Shri Sunil Lall, assisted by Shri Tanvir Islam Siddiqui, learned counsel for the applicant , learned counsel appearing for the victim as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is languishing in jail since 26.04.2025. Since, April 2025, he is available for custodial interrogation, but after filing of the chargesheet, custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required. From the possession of the applicant, two mobile phones, some documents, voter ID, Aadhar card and a cash of Rs. 1500 has been recovered. There is no public witness to the said recovery. The applicant has criminal history of one case which has been explained in paragraph-14 of the bail application. The applicant undertakes to co-operate in the trial. 3. It is further submitted that the chargesheet in the said case has been filed, the copy of the same has not been served by the trial court to the applicant, therefore, he is not in a position to confront the charges made against him. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra versus Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in 2012 AIR SC 830, wherein it is submitted that detention before conviction is exceptional; Article 21 mandates presumed innocence and speedy trial. There is no reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses or evidence or absconding from the trial, the accused is entitled to grant of bail. 5. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel appearing for the victim Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anurag Tripathi, Anurag Tripathi, Rajesh Chandra Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Shailendra Kumar Tiwari Nazahir Husain @ (Mazahir Husain) .....Applicant(s) The State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) 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, the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra (surpra), the period for which the applicant is in jail i.e. since 26.04.2025; the fact that the applicant has explained criminal history of one case in paragraph-14 of the bail application; the fact that there is no independent public witness to the said recovery as also the fact that chargesheet in the case 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 Nazahir Hussain @ Mazahir Hussain, involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 173 of, Under Sections- 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) B.N.S., Police Station- Gomti Nagar, District- Lucknow, 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 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 in accordance with law. (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 Section 84 BAIL No. 6526 of 2025 2 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 IPC (now Section 209 of BNS). 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 3, 2025 DiVYa BAIL No. 6526 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench