HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33996 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard counsel for the applicant, Sri Mohit Kumar, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Rajive Kumar, counsel for the informant and Sri Shashank Shekhar Pandey, learned AGA for the State-opposite party. Perused the material available on record. 2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 506 of 2025, under Section 105 B.N.S., Police Station- Baraut, District- Baghpat, during the pendency of the trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The name of the applicant surfaced in an inquiry conducted by the Sub Divisional Officer, Electricity Distribution Division-III, Baraut, Baghpat. It is next contended that the cause of death of deceased Pankaj was due to an accident. The applicant has no role in the alleged incident. Identically placed co-accused Naresh Tomar alias Billu has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 13.10.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.35145 of 2025. The applicant claims parity. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant is in jail since 19.8.2025 and in case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned AGA and counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not named in the first information report. Only on the basis of an inquiry report the name of the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashutosh Singh, Neetu Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Prabhakar Dwivedi, Rajive Kumar Amit Tomar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) applicant surfaced. Identically placed co-accused Naresh Tomar alias Billu has been granted bail by this Court. Further, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and has remained confined for more than one and half months 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. 6. Let the applicant Amit Tomar, 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. 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 Manish Kr BAIL No. 33996 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad