HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21818 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Rajendra Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned State Law Officer and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 410 of 2024, under Sections 109, 3(5), 115(2), 238 of BNS, Police Station - Lalpur Pandeypur, District - Varanasi, during the pendency of trial. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the name of the applicant has come up in the statement of co-accused person which has no evidentiary value in the eyes of law. The FIR is delayed by two days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 5. Learned counsel has further stated that similarly placed co-accused person, Shashi Prakash Singh @ Raju Yadav, has already been enlarged on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.5.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4573 of 2025. It is further submitted that since the case of the applicant is at a better footing to the case 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 applicant is languishing in jail since 25.03.2025, having no criminal history. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial. 6. The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned State Law Officer. 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. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, evidence on record, pending trial and in the light of the judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Nagina Singh Yadav, Rajendra Kumar Pandey, Smt. Kirti Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Munna Yadav @ Mukesh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 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 judgement of Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity. 8. Let the applicant- Munna Yadav @ Mukesh, 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 will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant will 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. September 15, 2025 Siddhant BAIL No. 21818 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad