HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34893 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shashank Shekhar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 64 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 110, 326(g), 131, 191, 190, 125, 105, 117(2) B.N.S., Police Station- Mahuli, District- Sant Kabir Nagar during pendency of the trial. 3. 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 first information report, four persons were nominated. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 14.3.2025. One of the injured namely, Santram succumbed to his injuries on 23.3.2025. According to the postmortem report, the deceased sustained two injuries, one upon the head and other a contusion around right eye. The name of the applicant was disclosed by the injured Chandresh, Radheyshyam, Vivek, Chandrakala, Nirmala. It is contended that the said statements are afterthought. Further the named co-accused Ratnesh Tiwari, Ashok Tiwari and Ashutosh Tiwari @ Golu have been granted bail by this court vide order dated 23.9.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 19893 of 2025 and 19424 of 2025. The case of the applicant stands on better footing from that of named co-accused. The applicant claims parity. The applicant is in jail since 11.6.2025 having no criminal history. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sikandar Khan Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ram Poojan Yadav Alias Aditya Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 4. Learned A.G.A. 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 the applicant was not named in the first information report. According to the postmortem report, the deceased sustained two injuries, one upon the head and other a contusion around right eye. The name of the applicant was disclosed by the injured Chandresh, Radheyshyam, Vivek, Chandrakala, Nirmala. The named co-accused Ratnesh Tiwari, Ashok Tiwari and Ashutosh Tiwari @ Golu have been granted bail by this court. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Further the applicant has presently remained confined for almost four months and 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 applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witness, 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, Ram Poojan Yadav @ Aditya Yadav involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: i. the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court. 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 S.S. BAIL No. 34893 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad