Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:34339 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8263 of 2025 Applicant :- Brajesh Kumar Alias Kalivan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Piyush Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Heard counsel for the applicant, Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant bail application, under Section 483 B.N.S.S., has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 116 of 2024, under Sections 309(6), 317(2) B.N.S., Police Station- Sahjhapur, District- Jhansi, during pendency of the trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant was not named in the first information report. The applicant was arrested on 28.12.2024 along with two other co-accused and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. False recovery of a country made pistol, a live cartridge and an Adhar card has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. Recovery of Indian currency of Rs. 520/- and a mobile phone has also been shown from the applicant. The said Indian currency and mobile belongs to him. No test identification parade was got conducted by the Police authorities. At present, there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The applicant is in jail since 28.12.2024, having no criminal history. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid facts from the record. 5. Having heard learned 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 substantive evidence against the applicant. Further, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and has remained confined for more than two months 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 merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant, Brajesh Kumar Alias Kalivan involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: i. the applicant shall not temper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; and, iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court. 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 :- 10.3.2025 Sachin Mishra Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad