HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6948 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1.Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record. 2.It is alleged in the prosecution case that on the saying of the co-accused Om Prakash Maurya, the informant along with others have invested in Shine City Infra Private Limited company in various projects of Shine City Infra Project. However, neither the invested amount has been returned nor in lieu thereof, any land has been provided; rather the amount has been usurped by the accused persons and several times more land was sold on papers although they were not having that much land. 3.Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the co-accused Meera Srivastava and Amitabh Kumar Srivastava alias Amitabh Srivastava have been granted bail vide orders dated 30.5.2024 and 6.5.2025 passed in Bail No.5892 of 2024 and 1878 of 2025 respectively. The applicant claims parity. The applicant has explained criminal history of 14 cases in para 21 of the bail application. The offences are triable by Magistrate. Till date, charges have not been framed. The trial is going on at a very slow pace. The applicant is in jail since 4.1.2024. 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. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pranshu Agrawal Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Durga Prasad .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) 4.Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant. 5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the fact that charges have not been framed and trial is yet to commence, the co- accused, above referred, have been enlarged on bail, the applicant has explained criminal history, the offence is triable by Magistrate, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the period for which the applicant is in jail and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. 6.Let the applicant Durga Prasad, involved in Case Crime No.1630 of 2019, under sections 420, 120-B, 409, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Gomti Nagar, district Lucknow, 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (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 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 I.P.C. (now 269 BNS) BAIL No. 6948 of 2025 2 (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 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 I.P.C. (now 209 BNS). 7.The application is allowed accordingly. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merit of the trial. October 8, 2025 kkb/ BAIL No. 6948 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench