HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33453 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard counsel for the applicants and Sri Anupam Anand, learned Brief Holder for the State-opposite party. Perused the material available on record. 2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicants 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- Sikanderpur, District- Ballia, during the pendency of the trial. 3. Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. Vague and general role has been assigned to the applicants. It is next contended that identically placed co-accused Anita has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 14.8.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.27919 of 2025. Applicants claim parity. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. The applicants are in jail since 25.04.2025 and in case, they are enlarged on bail, they 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 counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that vague and general role has been assigned to the applicants and identically placed co-accused Anita has been granted bail by this Court. Further, the applicants have no criminal antecedents and have remained confined for more than five months and after submission of charge sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicants, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manan Kumar Choubey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Mamta And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. 6. Let the applicants Mamta and Pintu, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the conditions that they : (i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (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 Manish Kr BAIL No. 33453 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad