Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:62407 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12550 of 2025 Applicant :- Titu @ Telemax Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Hemant Sharma,Saurabh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J. 1. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed the supplementary affidavit before the Court in which criminal history of one case has been explained. 2. Instant application filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S seeking bail in Case Crime No. 0082 of 2025, under Sections 318 (4), 338, 336 (3), 340 (2), 61 (2) of B.N.S., Police Station Shahganj, District Agra. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that applicant is not named in the first information report and he has not committed any offence as alleged in the first information report. He has been falsely implicated in the instant case due to ulterior motive. On the statement of co-accused his name has come into light for the first time. As per prosecution story, the complainant was appointed as Record Keeper in the Central Record Room, Tehsil Sadar on 17.02.2025. It is also submitted that some irregularities were pointed out in the said department and after preliminary enquiry, the complainant has lodged the instant first information report alleging that documents of the record room have been forged by the accused persons. Learned counsel further submitted that applicant is working in the said department and he was not aware about any fabrication or forgery of any documents. He was only helping the co-accused Chitra Singh. It is also submitted that the name of applicant has come into picture due to allegation made by Baba Munsi Das who was working in the said department but he has already expired. It is also submitted that co- accused Chitra Singh has already been enlarged by this Court vide order dated 15.04.2025. It is submitted that since no specific role has been assigned to the applicant and only role has been assigned to him to help the co-accused Chitra Singh for pasting the forged documents in place of genuine documents in the register maintained in the record room. Learned counsel further submitted that applicant has one case criminal history which has been explained in para-2 of the supplementary affidavit filed in support of bail application. He further submitted that considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, applicant may also be enlarged on bail. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of applicant also undertaken that he will abide by all terms and conditions as imposed by this Court while granting bail. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of State vehemently opposed the instant bail application submitting that the allegation against the applicant is that he was helping the co- accused Chitra Singh in pasting of forged and fabricated sale deed in place of original record. Investigation is still going on. The applicant is equally responsible in the commission of the offence as alleged in the first information report. However, he has not contradicted the fact that applicant has one case criminal history which has been explained in the supplementary affidavit. In view of the aforesaid facts, he has stated that applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State in advance notice and perused the contents made in the first information report as well as material placed on record. 6. The nature of allegation against the applicant is only for helping the co-accused Chitra Singh in pasting fake and forged documents in place of original documents in the register maintained by the record room. Recovery of Rs. 10,000/- shown from the possession of the applicant has also been disputed by the defence counsel as there is no independent witness of the said recovery. Applicant has one case criminal history which has already been explained in the supplementary affidavit as stated above. He is languishing in jail since 04.03.2025. There is no chance of completion of trial in near future. It is also undertaken on behalf of applicant that he will abide by all terms and conditions as imposed by this Court while granting bail. 7. Taking into consideration all entirety of the matter as discussed above and the fact that co-accused Chitra Singh has already been enlarged on bail by this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant- Titu @ Telemax who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- 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 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. 9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Order Date :- 24.4.2025 AKT (Chandra Dhari Singh, J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad