Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:31696 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7806 of 2025 Applicant :- Vikas Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar Yadav,Saurabh Chaturvedi,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State-respondent and perused the record. 2. The instant bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 11 of 2025, under Sections 316(2), 316(3), 317(2), 61(2) BNS, Police Station Ikdil, District Etawah, during the pendency of trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. False recovery of 56 mobile phones has been shown from a Car, which does not belong to the applicant. In the said Car apart from the applicant five other persons were present. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. At this stage there is no credible evidence to establish that the said mobile phones were stolen property. In fact, the co-accused Atul claims that the said mobile phones belong to him. The applicant is in jail since 18.01.2025 having no criminal history and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused 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. At this stage there is no credible evidence to establish that the said mobile phones were stolen property. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant has remained confined for more than one month and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when 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, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant Vikas son of Rajendra Prasad, involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the 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; (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 7. 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 :- 5.3.2025 Lbm/- Digitally signed by :- LAL BAHADUR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad