HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33396 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anupam Anand, learned Brief Holder for the State-opposite party. 2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 101 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 109, 105, 117(2) B.N.S., Police Station Sikandarpur, District Ballia during the pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the present case. In the third statement of the informant the name of the applicant and one Rohit @ Chandan surfaced. It is contended that the said statement is an afterthought. Vague and general allegations have been levelled against the applicant. It is next contended that Rohit @ Chandan has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 23.08.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 27317 of 2025, Rohit Kumar v. State of U.P. The applicant claims parity. The applicant is in jail since 22.07.2025 having no criminal history and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned Brief Holder for the State has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not named in Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pramod Kumar, Sarvesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pankaj Rajbhar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) the first information report; his name surfaced in the third statement of the informant; vague and general allegations have been levelled against the applicant; and, identically placed co-accused Rohit @ Chandan has been granted bail by this Court. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for more than two months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, and no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant- Pankaj Rajbhar, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that he: (i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and, (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. October 10, 2025 SKT/- BAIL No. 33396 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad