HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1644 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Supplementary Affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in FIR, No.406 of 2025, Under Sections: 61(2)(a), 318(4), 338, 336(2), 340(2), 350 BNS and Seciton 60 and 72 of Uttar Pradesh Excise Act, Police Station Krishna Nagar, District Lucknow. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has explained the criminal history of one case in paragraph 3 of the Supplementary Affidavit. The offence is triable by a Magistrate. The name of the applicant has surfaced in the confessional statement of co-accused Prashant Jaiswal. The investigation is still in progress, and the applicant undertakes to cooperate in the same. It is further submitted that co-accused persons, namely Ankit Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Smt. Shikha Srivastava, Abhinav Pankaj, Avneet Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s): G.A. Rahul .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Jaisawal, Shashank Nigam, Vikas Jaiswal, and Prashant Jaiswal, have already been granted anticipatory bail and regular bail by this Court vide orders dated 4.11.2025, 14.10.2025, 17.10.2025, and 14.10.2025, respectively. The applicant, therefore, seeks parity with the aforesaid co-accused persons. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that if the accused is granted anticipatory bail, he undertakes to comply with all conditions imposed by the Court. He shall fully cooperate with the investigation and shall not misuse the liberty granted to him. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application however could not dispute that it is a case of parity. On due consideration of the facts that the name of the applicant has surfaced in the confessional statement of the co-accused recorded during police custody, without there being any independent witness on record; there is no independent witness to the incident; the applicant has explained the criminal history; the offence is triable by a Magistrate; and taking into account the anticipatory bail/regular bail orders of the co-accused persons named above, as well as the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant to cooperate with the investigation, I am of the opinion that the applicant deserves to be released on anticipatory bail in light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, subject to his continued cooperation in the investigation. In view of the above, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid Case Crime number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned with the following conditions:- The applicant shall report to the investigating officer within twenty days from today. He shall cooperate in the investigation and he will NABAIL No. 1644 of 2025 2 not influence the witness. The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned call(s) for investigation/interrogation. The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. The application is allowed on the ground of parity. November 7, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S NABAIL No. 1644 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench