Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:70217 Court No. - 86 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7615 of 2025 Applicant :- Vicky Sonkar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kamlesh Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that according to the prosecution version the incident took place on 20.08.2024 at 08.24 p.m. but the F.I.R. was lodged on 21.08.2024 at 01.53 p.m. after a delay of 16 hours without any explanation of delay. In his statement the first informant has assigned general role to all the accused persons. The injured in his statement also has not assigned any specific role to any of the accused and has only assigned general role against all the accused persons. One co-accused Ankit has already been enlarged on bail on the same set of evidence, therefore on the ground of parity applicant should also be enlarged on bail. As to the criminal history, there are seven cases into the credit of applicant, and the same has been explained satisfactorily in the supplementary affidavit filed today. 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 the applicant is in jail since 12.02.2025. 4. Though, the learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail but he has not disputed that general allegation has been made against the applicant and no specific allegation has been made against him. 5. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence and without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed. 6. Let the applicant-Vicky Sonkar, be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 450 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 109, 3(5) of B.N.S., Police Station- Shahpur, District- Gorakhpur, on executing a personal bond and furnishing two local sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions: i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court. iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission. v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 7. In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant in accordance with law. Order Date :- 2.5.2025 Mustaqeem. Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad