Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:33821 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6226 of 2025 Applicant :- Kartar Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kartikey Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant bail application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C., has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 318 of 2024, under Sections 318 (4), 61(2) B.N.S., Police Station- Sadar Bazar, District- Mathura during 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 instant case. The disputed amount was transferred in the account of co-accused Monika. The applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. No amount has been transferred in the account of the applicant. The applicant is not a beneficiary of the illicit transaction. The applicant was a marginal witness of a sale deed executed in favour of co-accused Monika. At this stage there is no credible evidence to link the with the offence. The applicant is in jail since 11.12.2024 and having no criminal antecedent. In case he is enlarged 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. 5. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that applicant was not named in the first information report. The disputed amount was transferred in the account of co-accused Monika. The applicant was a marginal witness of a sale deed executed in favour of co- accused Monika. At this stage there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Further the applicant has presently remained confined for almost three 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 intimidate the witness, 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, Kartar Singh involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: i. the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court. 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. Order Date :- 6.3.2025 Kumar Manish Digitally signed by :- MANISH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad