HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24105 of 2025 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Sandeep Maniji Bakhshi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ahsutosh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Deepak Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 53 of 2025, under Sections 103(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 352, 61(2), 351(1), 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 317(2) B.N.S. and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station- Dhanapur, District- Chandauli, 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. The FIR is delayed by about nine hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The applicant is not named in the FIR and his name has come up subsequently in the statement of a squealer, whereby vehicle was recovered from a pond nearby. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that it has also come up that said accused person who committed the said crime used to gather at the house of the applicant and might have hatched the conspiracy. After the said incident, the said car is stated to have stopped at the gate of house of the applicant and the accused persons are stated to have escaped from the house of applicant only. The said allegations are vague. Even no villager had heard the applicant hatching conspiracy for said murder with any other persons. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pankaj Kumar Rai, Sandeep Maniji Bakhshi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ashutosh Kumar Pandey, G.A. Manoj Kumar Tripathi Alias Pappu .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 6. 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 7.5.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application there are several villagers who had seen the actual assailants named in the FIR gathering in the house of the applicant. Even the accused persons had stopped at the house of applicant after committing the said crime. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the fact that applicant is not named in the FIR and his name has come up in the statement of a squealer, and 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. 9. Let the applicant- Manoj Kumar Tripathi Alias Pappu, 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 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. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 11. 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. (Krishan Pahal,J.) September 1, 2025 Vikas Verma BAIL No. 24105 of 2025 2 Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad