Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:78779 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8741 of 2025 Applicant :- Shiv Prasad Alias Sudhai Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Dubey,Saumitra Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- Chandra Shekhar Mishra,G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Saumitra Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rama Shankar Yadav, learned Advocate holding brief for Sri Chandra Shekhar Mishra, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri R.P. Singh, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 134 of 2023, U/S 395 IPC, Police Station Kaudhiyara, District Prayagraj, during the pendency of trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. It is stated that he has nothing to do with the said offence. He was granted bail by this Court in the instant case vide order dated 21.1.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 39442 of 2024 but subsequently, the final report has been submitted in the added Section of 395 IPC as well. The applicant is entitled for bail in the added section also. 5. There is a criminal history of three cases assigned to the applicant, which stands explained in paragraph 14 of the affidavit accompanying the bail application. The applicant is languishing in jail since 7.8.2024. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Learned State Law Officer and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application but have not disputed the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the applicant. 7. In the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648, the Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused by itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant- Shiv Prasad Alias Sudhai involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence. (ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. 11. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 14.5.2025 Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad