Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:139238 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6832 of 2025 Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Monis,Rahul Saroj Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vijay Kumar,Vimal Kant Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Chandan Singh the learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Vinod Kant, learned counsel for the informant and perused the entire material available on record. 2. The applicant-Sanjay Kumar has filed the instant bail application with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Crime No.293 of 2024, under Sections 303(2), 318(4) of B.N.S., Police Station Titavi, District Muzaffar Nagar, during the pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the incident is alleged to occurred between 15.11.2024 to 06.12.2024 whereas the F.I.R. has been lodged on 10.12.2024 without there being any plausible explanation of such an inordinate delay. Learned counsel further submits that allegation is that the informant was checking his balance in the A.T.M. booth during which time, one person came behind him and asked him to collect his slip during the said conversation, the his A.T.M. card was changed and from the account of the informant Rs. 8,50,000/- was withdrawn at different time. Learned counsel submits that the applicant was not named in the F .I.R., however the applicant was arrested on 16.12.2024 and has been implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Learned counsel further submits that the alleged A.T.M. cards, which is shown to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant is planted by the police only to show their good work. In fact, no such recovery has been made from the person of the applicant. Learned counsel next submits apart from the A.T.M. cards nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. He further submits that similarly situated co-accused Mohit has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 14.05.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 10000 of 23025. It is thus contended that the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 17.12.2024. 5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and argued that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. 6. Perusal of the record shows that A.T.Ms. cards have been recovered from the possession of the applicant. So far as parity with the accused Mohit is concerned, the accused Mohit was not seen in the C.C.T.V.footage, whereas the applicant was seen in the C.C.T.V.footage, thus the case of the applicant is distinguishable with the case of the accused Mohit. Apart from it, the applicant has criminal history of six cases which pertains to the same offence, in which the applicant is seeking bail. 7. Keeping in view submissions of learned counsel for the parties, gravity of offence, nature of allegations and all the attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I do not find any good reason to exercise my discretion in favour of the accused-applicant. 8. Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected. Order Date :- 13.8.2025 S.Ali Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad