HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17637 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Desh Ratan Chaudhary, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Prateek Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Amit Kumar, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.253 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 333, 109(1), 351(3) B.N.S., 2023, 7 C.L.A. Act and 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station Robertsganj, District Sonebhadra, during the pendency of trial. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused person Ritesh Kumar Mishra has already been enlarged on bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.6.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.18061 of 2025, as such, since the role of the applicant is identical to that of co-accused, who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. The criminal history of eleven cases assigned to the applicant stands explained. He is languishing in jail since 12.04.2025. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 5. The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Desh Ratan Chaudhary, Rakesh Chandra, Sanjay Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Prateek Srivastava Vedantkant Pandey .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) the parity to the co-accused has not been disputed by them. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and in light of the judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 and the judgements passed by the Supreme Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 and in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigationa and Another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for grant of bail on the ground of parity. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity. 7. Let the applicant- Vedantkant Pandey, 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 during trial. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 9. 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. September 15, 2025 (Ravi Kant) BAIL No. 17637 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad