Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:31435 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23148 of 2024 Applicant :- Awanesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Singh,Shiv Sharan Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Puneet Bhadauria,Vipin Kumar Narauriya Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Heard counsel for the applicant, Sri Puneet Bhadauria, counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State- opposite party. 2. The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 178 of 2023 under Sections 498-A, 323, 506, 364, 120-B of I.P.C., Police Station- Dholna, District- Kasganj, during the pendency of the trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is brother-in- law of the victim. He lives separately with his wife. There are vague and general allegations against the applicant. The role of conspiracy has been assigned to the applicant. The case of the applicant is clearly distinguishable from that of Shyam alias Abhishek. Further charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant. The trial is moving at a snail's pace and is not likely to conclude early. The applicant is not responsible for the delay in the trial. Inordinate delay in concluding the trial has led to virtually and indefinite imprisonment of the applicant without there being any credible evidence to implicate him in the offence and violates the rights of the applicant to a speedy trial. It is next contended that the identically placed co-accused, Rajkumari @ Sarvesh Kumari has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 08.08.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.10275 of 2024. The applicant claims parity. The applicant is in jail since 20.10.2023, having no criminal history. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned A.G.A. and counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that there are vague and general allegations against the applicant. The identically placed co-accused, Rajkumari @ Sarvesh Kumari has been granted bail by this Court. The role of conspiracy has been assigned to the applicant. At present, there is no substantive evidence against the applicant. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant has remained confined for more than one year and four months and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant- Awanesh, involved in aforesaid case 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 the conditions that he: (i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 4.3.2025 SFH Digitally signed by :- SYED FAHIM HUSAIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad