HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36381 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Abhishek Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Kamla Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anurag Tripathi, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Arun Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicants seek bail in Case Crime No.202 of 2025, under Sections 103(1), 191(2), 191(3), 118(1), 3(5) BNS, Police Station Sewarahi, District Kushi Nagar, during the pendency of trial. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that similarly placed co-accused persons, Sonu Nishad and Sachin Nishad have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 14.10.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.35534 of 2025. The applicants are languishing in jail since 27.6.2025, having no criminal history. He further submitted that since the role of the applicants is identical to that of co- accused, who have already been enlarged on bail, they are also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. 5. The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. on the ground that it is true that case of applicant is at par with co-accused person, but there is ocular evidence of the instant case as eye-witness account corroborates that applicant was present at the place of offence and had caught hold of the deceased person. However, the aforesaid factual aspects of parity to the co-accused and of no criminal Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kamla Singh, Vijay Shanker Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sani @ Vijay And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) history of the applicants, have not been disputed by them. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and also taking into consideration the judgment of the Supreme Court passed in the case of Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 and the judgment of this Court passed in the case of Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Cri.L.J. 938 coupled with the judgment of Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a case for bail on the ground of parity. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity. 7. The case of applicants stands distinguished to main accused person Prince. 8. Let the applicants- Sani @ Vijay and Natthu Nishad involved in aforementioned case crime number 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 following conditions. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicants and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. 11. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicants shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion on the testimony of the witnesses. October 17, 2025 Vikas Verma BAIL No. 36381 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad