Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:66560 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13971 of 2025 Applicant :- Shubham Bhartiya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- Buddhi Prakash,G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rishabh Tiwari, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.380 of 2024, under Sections 65(1) B.N.S., Police Station- Karchhana, District- Prayagraj, during the pendency of trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that in the instant case the applicant was enlarged on bail by this Court under Sections 74, 351(3), 64(1) B.N.S. and 3/4 POCSO Act vide order dated 4.3.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.7437 of 2025. Later on the final report (charge-sheet) has been submitted in added Section 65(1) B.N.S. Learned counsel has further stated that the applicant has not misused the said liberty granted to him earlier on. The applicant is languishing in jail since 27.12.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed much reliance on the judgments of the Supreme Court passed in case of Bhadresh Bipinbhai Sheth vs. State of Gujarat & Another, 2016 (1) SCC (Cri) 240 and Manoj Suresh Jadhav & Ors. vs. The State of Maharashtra, 2018 SCC OnLine SC 3428, wherein the applicant therein was enlarged on anticipatory bail in the added sections U/S 438 Cr.P.C. after being enlarged on regular bail U/S 439 Cr.P.C. Although the instant case is of regular bail, but it can be considered to be on better footing. 6. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that applicant has deliberately concealed the fact as he has knowledge that final report (charge-sheet) has already been filed U/s 65(1) B.N.S., as such, he is not entitled for bail. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration that applicant was already enlarged on bail and he has not misused the said opportunity granted to him earlier on, 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. 8. Let the applicant- Shubham Bhartiya, 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 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. 10. 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 :- 29.4.2025 Vikas (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad