Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:35335 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8455 of 2025 Applicant :- Majhar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akash Tyagi,Neha Tyagi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party. 3. The instant bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 387 of 2024, under Sections 310(2), 317(3) B.N.S., Police Station Lohiya Nagar, District Meerut during the pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report. On the basis of the information furnished by the informer the applicant was arrested along with two co-accused and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. False recovery of ornaments of yellow and white metals, Indian currency of Rs.33,400/- and 8 Saudi Riyal as well as a visiting card has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. Identically placed co- accused Sarfaraz and Aslam have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 20.01.2025 and 24.01.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 42061 of 2024 (Sarfaraz v. State of U.P.) and 45584 of 2024 (Aslam v. State of U.P.). The applicant claims parity. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in Paragraph- 16 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application and Paragraph-4 of the supplementary affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 26.08.2024 and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not named in the first information report. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. Identically placed co-accused Sarfaraz and Aslam have been granted bail by this Court. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for more than six months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, and 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 delay the trial or intimidate the witness, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 7. Let the applicant- Majhar, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that he: (i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and, (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 8. 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 :- 11.3.2025 SKT/- Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad