HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11185 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the alleged recovery of 37 QR codes, one quarter of Royal Stag, and seven quarters of country-made liquor is false. It is further argued that no independent witness was present during the alleged recovery. The co-accused Ravi Shankar, who is attributed a similar role, has been granted anticipatory bail, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure No. 3 to the bail application. The applicant has explained the criminal history of five cases in paragraph 16 of the bail application. The offence is triable by the Magistrate. 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. 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. Considering that the offence is triable by the Magistrate, the applicant has explained the criminal history of five cases, the co-accused Ravi Shankar has already been granted bail, and the applicant is in custody since 20.09.2025, I am of the view that this is a fit case for granting bail to the applicant. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Faizal Hashmi, Raj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Girdhari Lal .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Girdhari Lal involved in Case Crime No.- 154/2025, Under Sections- 318(4), 319(2), 338, 336(3) Β.Ν.S. & 60(1) Excise Act, Police Station- Kumarganj, District- Ayodhya, 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 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). 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 15, 2025/R.C. BAIL No. 11185 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench