Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:40640 Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1047 of 2025 Applicant :- Preet Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mayank Yadav,Vivek Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State-respondent and perused the record. 2. The instant bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 577 of 2024, under Sections 319(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2) BNS, Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat during the pendency of trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. On the basis of date of birth recorded as 07.07.1994, the applicant had filled up the form for recruitment for the post of constable in U. P. Police, 2023. In the High School certificate, the same date of birth of the applicant was recorded. The applicant has not forged the High School certificate. It is next contended that identically placed co-accused Anuj Kumar has been granted bail by the co-ordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 17.12.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 41414 of 2024. The applicant claims parity. The applicant is in jail since 01.09.2024 having no criminal history and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that the date of birth mentioned in form for the post of constable in U. P. Police Examination, 2023 is the same as recorded in the High School certificate of the applicant. Identically placed co-accused Anuj Kumar has been granted bail by the co-ordinate bench of this Court. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. At this stage, there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The applicant has remained confined for more than six months and after submission of the charge-sheet 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 the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant Preet Singh involved in the aforesaid case 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 the conditions that he: (i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 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 :- 20.3.2025 Lbm/- Digitally signed by :- LAL BAHADUR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad