HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35446 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party. 2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 64 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 110, 326(Cha), 131, 191(2), 190, 125, 105, 117(2) B.N.S., Police Station Mahuli, District Sant Kabir Nagar during the pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. According to the postmortem report, two injuries were found on the body of the deceased, one on the head and another a contusion around right eye. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender who caused injury on the head of the deceased. It is next contended that identically placed co-accused Ratnesh Tiwari, Ashok Tiwari and Ashutosh Tiwari have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 23.09.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 19893 of 2025, Ratnesh Tiwari and another v. State of U.P., and 19424 of 2025, Ashutosh Tiwari @ Golu v. State of U.P. The applicant claims parity. The applicant is in jail since 16.03.2025 having no criminal history and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Girja Shanker Mishra, Pratiksha Rai Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rakesh Tiwari .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that according to the postmortem report, two injuries were found on the body of the deceased, one on the head and another a contusion around right eye. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender who caused injury on the head of the deceased. Identically placed co-accused Ratnesh Tiwari, Ashok Tiwari and Ashutosh Tiwari have been granted bail by this Court. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for almost seven months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, and 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, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant- Rakesh Tiwari, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of 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; and, (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 7. 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 14, 2025 SKT/- BAIL No. 35446 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad