HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8205 of 2025 Court No. - 70 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1. Rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant today in the Court, is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The accused applicant is involved in Case Crime No.24 of 2025 under Sections 308(5), 308(3), 191(2), 352, 61(2) B.N.S., Police Station Campierganj, District Gorakhpur. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegation against the applicant is that he has demand ransom of Rs. 5000/-. Learned counsel further argued that perusal of the F.I.R. would go to show that the demanded amount has been asked to be transferred in bank account of the applicant, which was transferred. He further submits that it cannot be believed by a man of ordinary prudence that a person would demand ransom to be transferred in his account. It is thus contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraph no.3 of the supplementary affidavit. 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 11.01.2025. 5. Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute the arguments advanced by learned Counsel for the applicants. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Deepak Kumar Srivastava, Ganesh Shanker Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Surendra Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 6. 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. 7. Let the applicant Surendra Yadav be released on bail in the aforementioned case crime number on executing a personal bond and furnishing two 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. v) The applicant shall not commit an 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. 8. In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the informant would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court. September 11, 2025 S.Ali BAIL No. 8205 of 2025 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad