HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37293 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Ms. Priyanka Devi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Santosh Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Ram Mohit Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Sessions Trial No. 125 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 45 of 2025, under Sections 103(1), 352, 3(5) of BNS and Sections 3/25 of Arms Act, Police Station - Kuthaund, District - Jalaun, during the pendency of trial. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused person, Smt. Neeraj and Smt. Madhuri, have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide orders dated 09.10.2025 and 17.10.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 32082 of 2025 and 36399 of 2025, respectively. It is further submitted that since the case of the applicant is at par to the co-accused, who have already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. 5. Learned counsel has also stated that the applicant is languishing in jail since 18.03.2025, having no criminal history. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dev Prakash Sharma, Priyanka Devi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pawan .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 6. The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant. However, the aforesaid factual aspects of parity to the co-accused and of no criminal history of the applicant, have not been disputed by them. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, evidence on record, pending trial and in the light of the judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 and the judgement passed by the Supreme Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 coupled with the judgement of Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity. 8. Let the applicant- Pawan, who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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 following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 10. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. October 29, 2025 Siddhant BAIL No. 37293 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad