HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19309 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Sanjeev Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 496 of 2024, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 & 471 of I.P.C. and Section 12 of Passport Act, Police Station - Badhalganj, District - Gorakhpur, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have got issued two passports in his name by making interpolation in the same. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. 6. Learned counsel has also stated that the applicant is languishing in jail since 03.05.2025, having no criminal history to his credit. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial. 7. Per contra, learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that it is an open and shut case as the applicant has got issued two passports by interpolating the details of his particulars, as such, he is not entitled for bail. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the applicant has got two passports by interpolating the details of his particulars, prima facie I do not find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. 9. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sanjeev Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Jayveer Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 10. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously, in view of the principle laid down in the recent judgements of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment. 11. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. September 15, 2025 Siddhant BAIL No. 19309 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad