Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:52874 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9144 of 2025 Applicant :- Anil Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar Srivastava,Neeraj Srivastava,Shubham Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. As informed by learned State Law Officer, notice to the informant has been served on 18.03.2025 but none is present on behalf of the informant. 2. Heard Sri Neeraj Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Amit Kumar, learned State Law Officer and also perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in PST No. 2215 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No. 149 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 70(2) of BNS and Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Pachkhora, District - Firozabad, during the pendency of trial. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused person, Ankul Kumar Yadav, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 27.02.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 43343 of 2024. It is further submitted that since the case of the applicant is at par to the co- accused, who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity although there were several allegations against him but the said allegations do not stand fortified by any evidence whatsoever. The applicant is languishing in jail since 09.09.2024 having no criminal history. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial. 5. The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned State Law Officer. However, the aforesaid factual aspects of parity to the co-accused and of no criminal history of the applicant, have not been disputed by him. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, evidence on record, pending trial and in the light of the judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 and the judgement passed by the Supreme Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 coupled with the judgement of Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity. 7. Let the applicant- Anil Kumar, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (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 BNSS 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. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 9. 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:- 10.4.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad