Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:119249 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6332 of 2025 Applicant :- Vinod Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Daga,S.P.S. Chauhan,Sukhendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant today is taken on record. 2. This is the second bail application. The first bail application was rejected by co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 29.11.2024. 3. Heard Sri Amit Daga, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ram Mohit Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 809 of 2023, under Sections 498A, 304B, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Kotwali Lalitpur, District Lalitpur, during the pendency of trial. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. 6. Learned counsel has further stated that at the time of adjudication of the said bail, one witness was examined only and he has not supported the prosecution story. Subsequent to it, another witness has been examined and he has completely resiled from his earlier statement and has been cross-examined by the public prosecutor after declaring him hostile. It is next stated that there are three other witnesses i.e. PW-3, PW-4 and PW-5, who are formal witnesses, as such there is no likelihood of conviction of the applicant in the present case. The Fundamental Rights of the applicant enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India stand violated. 7. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 27.10.2023 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history. 9. In the judgement passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. K.A. Najeeb, AIR 2021 SC 712, it has been held as follows:- "We are conscious of the fact that the charges levelled against the respondent are grave and a serious threat to societal harmony. Had it been a case at the threshold, we would have outrightly turned down the respondent's prayer. However, keeping in mind the length of the period spent by him in custody and the unlikelihood of the trial being completed anytime soon, the High Court appears to have been left with no other option except to grant bail. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that PW-1 and PW-2 have not supported the prosecution story, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant- Vinod, who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 13. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 22.7.2025 Sumit S (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad