Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:95290 Court No. - 48 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19633 of 2025 Applicant :- Imran Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- B.N.Singh,Manish Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 77 of 2025, under Sections 318(4)/319(2)/338/336(3)/340(2)/3/5 B.N.S. Act & Section 13 of Gambling Act & Sections 66-C/66-D of I.T. Act, Police Station- Kalyanpur, District- Kanpur Nagar, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation that applicant was indulging in online gambling regarding cricket match between India and Bangladesh, is wholly false. There is no independent witness of alleged recovery of mobile phones and other materials. It is further submitted that there is no credible evidence to support the alleged gambling. Similarly placed co-accused namely, Ashutosh @ Sundaram Tiwari has been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 01.05.2025. The applicant is in judicial custody since 21.02.2025. The applicant has no criminal history. It was submitted that in case applicant is granted bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would co-operate during trial. 5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer of bail but it could not be disputed that similarly placed co-accused person has already been granted bail. 6. I have considered rival submissions and perused the record. 7. It is well settled that at pre-conviction stage, there is presumption of innocence. The object of keeping a person in custody is to ensure his availability to face the trial and to receive the sentence that may be passed. The detention is not supposed to be punitive or preventive. Seriousness of the allegation or the availability of material in support thereof are not the only considerations for declining bail. In this connection reference may be made to case of Vinod Bhandari v. State of M.P., (2015) 11 Supreme Court Cases 502. 8. In the instant matter, considering submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusations, period of detention and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits, a case for bail is made out. Accordingly, the bail application is hereby allowed. 9. Let the applicant Imran, involved in aforesaid case crime, 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 the evidence during the trial. (ii). The applicant shall not pressurize / intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii). The applicant shall appear before the Trial Court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. (iv). 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the police. 10. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the Court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel bail of applicant in accordance with law. Order Date :- 4.6.2025 Rama Kant Digitally signed by :- RAMA KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad