Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:114660 Court No. - 68 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17126 of 2025 Applicant :- Pranjal Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Pandey,Sheshadri Trivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J. 1. Heard Sri Satish Trivedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Sheshadri Trivedi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ramesh Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 77 of 2025, under Sections- 316(2), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) and 3(6) of B.N.S., Police Station- Bindki, District-Fatehpur, during the pendency of the trial. 3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. but subsequently, merely on the basis of the statement of first informant, he has been falsely implicated in the instant case. It has been submitted that the applicant who used to sit along with other co-accused persons at the office of Garima Traders. It has been further submitted that The applicant is neither an employee nor a partner of Garima Traders or of the Dharmkata run by his father. It has been further submitted that all the offences are punishable upto 7 years. Charge sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no requirement of custodial interrogation. He further submitted that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and he is languishing in jail since 05.03.2025 having no criminal history to his credit. In case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. 4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. 5. Thus, considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case as well as law laid down by the Apex Court regarding offences punishable upto 7 years in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another reported in (2021) 10 SCC 773 and Siddharth vs State of U.P. and another; (2022) 1 SCC 676 and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion 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- Pranjal Gupta involved in the aforementioned 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, with the following conditions:- i. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. ii. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely without seeking any adjournment. iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed by him. 7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 8. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 15.7.2025 Manoj Digitally signed by :- MANOJ KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad