HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37556 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard Sri Vinay Saran, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Anurag Mishra, counsel for the applicant and Sri Rupak Chaubey, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 2. The present bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 0290 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 338, 340(1), 342(2), 336(3), 111 BNS, Police Station Pilkhuwa, District Hapur, during the pendency of trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. False recovery of mark-sheets, two mobile phones, a cheque book, an Aadhar card, one HDFC bank card and Indian currency of Rs.5700/- has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. Further, the applicant has not forged and tampered any documents. It is next contended that the recovered items cannot link the applicant with the alleged offence. The marksheets and degrees are not 'valuable security' as defined under Section 2 (31) BNS. In support of his submission, counsel for the applicant has placed reliance upon the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shriniwas Pandit Dharmadhikari Vs. State of Maharashtra (1980) 4 SCC 551. Further, the co-accused Vijender Singh @ Vijender Singh Hudda has been granted bail by the co-ordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 14.10.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 31128 of 2025. The case of the applicant is on better footing to that of co-accused Vijender Singh @ Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anurag Mishra, Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sandeep Kumar @ Sandeep Sehrawat .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Vijender Singh Hudda. It is further contended that the applicant is neither a member of any organized crime syndicate nor he acted on behalf of such syndicate. The applicant is in jail since 18.05.2025 having no criminal history and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned AGA 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 there is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The mark-sheets and degrees are not 'valuable security' as defined under Section 2 (31) BNS. Co-accused Vijender Singh @ Vijender Singh Hudda has been granted bail by the co-ordinate bench of this Court. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Further, the applicant has 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 applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial 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 Sandeep Kumar @ Sandeep Sehrawat, 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 the 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 29, 2025 Manish Kr BAIL No. 37556 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad