HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36325 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Mr. Imtiyaz Husain, Advocate has filed vakalatnama on behalf of the informant. The same is taken on record. 2. Heard counsel for the applicant, counsel for the informant and Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned AGA for the State-opposite party. Perused the material available on record. 3. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 532 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 191(2), 352 and 105 B.N.S., Police Station- Majhola, District- Moradabad, during the pendency of the trial. 4. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per the first information report, the applicant along with six named accused is alleged to have assaulted the brother of the informant. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender who caused injuries to the deceased. It is next contended that identically placed co-accused Mukhtiyar urf Mukhiya and Muslim have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 04.9.2025 and 15.9.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.29478 of 2025 and 26932 of 2025 respectively. The applicant claims parity. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant is in jail since 28.8.2025 and in case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 5. Learned AGA and counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Syed Faiz Hasnain Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Asif .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 6. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that a vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant; the applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender who caused injuries to the deceased and identically placed co-accused Mukhtiyar urf Mukhiya and Muslim have been granted bail by this Court. Further, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and has remained confined for more than one month 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 merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 7. Let the applicant Asif, involved in the aforesaid case crime 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 the conditions that he: (i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 8. 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 17, 2025 Manish Kr BAIL No. 36325 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad