Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:119557 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17882 of 2025 Applicant :- Mankesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Shri Rajesh Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Shri Arun Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.252 of 2024, under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 109 B.N.S., Police Station- Achhalda, District- Auraiya, during the pendency of trial. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is not named in the FIR. The name of the applicant has come up in the confessional statement of co-accused person which has no evidentiary value in the eyes of law. The main assailant and named accused person Rajnesh Yadav has already been enlarged on bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.4.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.7990 of 2025. The applicant is languishing in jail since 14.4.2025, having no criminal history to his credit. He further submitted that since the case of the applicant is at better footing 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. 5. The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspects of parity to the co- accused and of no criminal history of the applicant, have not been disputed by him. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and also taking into consideration the judgment of the Supreme Court passed in the case of Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 and the judgment of this Court passed in the case of Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Cri.L.J. 938 coupled with the judgment of Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825, 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 on the ground of parity. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity. 7. Let the applicant- Mankesh Kumar involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate 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, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. 9. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. 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 on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 22.7.2025 Vikas (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad