HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9164 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.190 of 2025, under Section 309(6), 61(2) BNS, Police Station Payagpur, District Bahraich. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that while the brother of the informant, Jitendra Kedia, was returning home at around 4:00 p.m., near Jhala Tarhar, three persons riding a motorcycle snatched his bag and fled towards Payagpur. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is not named in the FIR. Both the complainant and the victim, in their statements, have not mentioned the name of the applicant. During investigation, the investigating officer, while examining the CCTV footage, traced the involvement of three co-accused persons; however, the presence or involvement of the applicant was not revealed in the footage. Investigating officer also did not find any connection of the applicant based on the CCTV footage. Both relevant portions of the case diary are on record and have been filed as Annexures-5 and 6 to the bail application. It is further submitted that later, during police custody, one Amresh Yadav @ Amrendra, in his confessional statement, mentioned the name of the applicant. He further submits that the applicant has explained the criminal history in paragraph 37 of the bail application. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manoj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Deepak Kashyap .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant and submitted that apart from the statement of the co-accused, the CDR records also verify that the applicant was in communication with the co-accused. However, the learned A.G.A. could not dispute the facts mentioned by the learned counsel for the applicant. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record. On due consideration of the facts that the applicant has been in custody since 02.08.2025, that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the matter, and that the applicant has explained his criminal history as well as the manner in which his name surfaced during the investigation, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find this to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Deepak Kashyap be released on bail in aforesaid first information report number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below concerned with the following conditions: (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant 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 applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 BAIL No. 9164 of 2025 2 trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the IPC (now Section 269 BNS). (vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS)is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the IPC (now Section 209 BNS). It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial. October 8, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S BAIL No. 9164 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench