Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:137853 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19873 of 2025 Applicant :- Pinki Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sitaram Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- Chandra Kumar Rai,G.A.,Girish Kumar Pandey,Tripurari Pal Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Rupesh Srivastava, Advocate holding brief of Sri Sitaram Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Chandra Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the informant, Ms. Ifra Islam, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 31 of 2025, under Sections 3(5), 110, 105, 115(2), 351(2), 352 B.N.S., Police Station- Dhohrighat, District- Mau, during the pendency of trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. It is argued that the case of the applicant is at par with the co-accused person Geeta who has been enlarged on bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.07.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 21284 of 2025. Although the order dated 04.07.2025 says that the case of the applicant is distinguishable to the co-accused person Geeta but the truth is that as per the statement of the informant recorded under Section 183 BNSS there are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons. 5. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 17.03.2025 and she is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned State Law Officer, however, the aforesaid factual aspect of the parity to the co-accused has not been disputed by him. 7. 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 judgement passed by the Supreme Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 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, 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 on the ground of parity. 8. Let the applicant- Pinki, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on her 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 pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 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 :- 13.8.2025 Karan (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- KARAN KUMAR RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad