HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37164 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri N.K.Sharma, 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. 173 of 2025, under Sections 310(2), 317(3), 111(2)(kh) BNS, Police Station Bilhaur, District Kanpur Nagar during the pendency of 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. On the basis of information furnished by the police informer, the applicant was arrested along with other accused. False recovery of Rs. 950/- has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. It is contended that identically placed co-accused Yashpal Yadav @ Raja and Km. Girja Chaudhary @ Gunnu @ Gunjun have been granted bail by the co-ordinate bench of this Court vide orders dated 29.08.2025 and 22.08.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.23984 of 2025 and 28052 of 2025. The applicant claims parity. It is next 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 13.05.2025 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 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anand Vibhor Singh, Karunesh Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Praveen Jatav Alias Praveen Alias Ankur .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 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. On the basis of information furnished by the police informer, the applicant was arrested along with other accused. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. Identically placed co-accused Yashpal Yadav @ Raja and Km. Girja Chaudhary @ Gunnu @ Gunjun have been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Further, the applicant has remained confined for more than five 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 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 Praveen Jatav @ Praveen @ Ankur, 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 Lbm/- BAIL No. 37164 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- LAL BAHADUR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad