Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:51432 Court No. - 68 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9642 of 2025 Applicant :- Mohd. Nehal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Parvez Iqbal Ansari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Shri Parvez Iqbal Ansari, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anil Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State- respondents and perused the record. 2. This bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant, Mohd. Nehal, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 60 of 2025, under Sections 318 (4), 338, 336 (3), 340 (2) BNS and Section 12 (1) B Pass Port Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Mau. 3. The allegation made in the FIR is that the applicant obtained a Pass Port No. S5453228 on 13.09.2018 in which his date of birth is mentioned as 04.02.2000. The applicant fraudulently obtained another Pass Port with the name of Nehal Ahmad son of Mazhar Ali T1189979 on 06.06.2019 in which his date of birth is mentioned as 04.02.1995. The applicant on Pass Port No. T1189979 had gone to Saudi Arabia. During investigation, the Academic Certificates of the applicant were checked and it was found that his date of birth is 04.02.2000 as such the applicant committed offence. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused- applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this case crime number and is languishing in jail since 21.02.2025. He has no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the whole case of prosecution is false, fabricated and concocted and the applicant has not committed any offence under the aforesaid sections. It is next submitted that when the applicant was returned India, immediately applied for cancellation of Pass Port No. T1189979 in the Regional Pass Port Office, Lucknow and the mother of the applicant approached Superintendent of Police, Mau and inquired the matter with the police then the first informant in hurry lodged the instant FIR against the applicant and sent him to jail. There is no independent witness in the present case. Hence, bail has been prayed for. 5. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the first informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts. 6. Considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the accused-applicant, Mohd. Nehal, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence. 2. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity. 3. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial. 4. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned. 9. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail. Order Date :- 8.4.2025 v.k.updh. Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad