HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9940 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 2. It is alleged that FIR was lodged on 17.06.2025 against five named persons excluding the applicants, and 15-20 unknown persons, stating that all the accused persons had assaulted the informant's nephew, Mukesh Jaishwal, with iron rods, and co-accused Massan fired a gunshot with intention to kill him. Thereafter, named co-accused persons, Monu and Sonu, also assaulted him with a stick. When the informant's son tried to save him, co-accused Aleem alias, Monu, fired a gunshot with intention to kill him, and he also suffered gunshot injury. The informant's other son also tried to save him, and he was also assaulted with iron rods and sticks. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the FIR was registered against five named accused persons and 15 to 20 unnamed accused person in the FIR and the applicant was not named in the FIR. During investigation on the basis of statement(s) under Section 161 CrPC, the prosecution story was changed and 12 persons were assigned general role. The co-accused Irshad Khan, who was also not named in the FIR and against whom, the general role of assault with iron rods was alleged, has been granted bail by the co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 03.09.2025 in Criminal Misc Bail Application No. 8107 of 2025, which is annexed as Annexure No. 24. There are two more co-accused namely Riyaz and Hasan Ali @ Sonu, who Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arun Sinha, Ram Chandra Singh, Siddhartha Sinha Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Naseeb And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) were named in the FIR. They have also been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 01.09.2025 and 09.09.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8123 of 2025 and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8531 of 2025 respectively, which are annexed as Annexure Nos. 22 and 23. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant claims parity with the bail order of co-accused namely Irshad Khan, whose role is similar to the applicant. He next submits that chargesheet in the case has already been filed. The applicants have no criminal history and they are in jail since 30.07.2025 and they undertakes that in case, they are granted bail, they will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. 5. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute that it is a case of parity. 6. On due consideration to the fact(s) that in the FIR, five persons were named along with allegations against 15-20 unknown persons and the role of causing gun shot injury is on other co-accused and there is no specific role against the applicants, the applicants are not named in the FIR, the bail orders of the co-accused persons, as also the fact that the applicants have no criminal history and they are languishing in jail since 30.07.2025 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicants on bail on the ground of parity. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicants- Naseeb, Rizwan Khan @ Bablu and Sahban involved in Case Crime No. 0269 of 2025 under Sections 3(5), 351(2), 352, 109(1), 110 BNS, and Section 7, Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Kotwali City, District Pratapgarh, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. BAIL No. 9940 of 2025 2 (ii) The applicants will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iv) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (v) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them in accordance with law. (vi) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 84 B.N.S.S. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of B.N.S. October 15, 2025 Raj BAIL No. 9940 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench