HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25361 of 2025 Court No. - 87 HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Atul Pandey, learned counsel for the informant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. 2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant Rishabh Chaudhary with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.149 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2) B.N.S. and Section 66(D) of I.T. Act, Police Station Kotwali, District- Pilibhit, during pendency of trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. Accused applicant is languishing in jail since 14.5.2025. It is submitted that the informant Nitin Malik is posted as constable in police department and he has falsely lodged criminal case against the applicant. It is further submitted that matter relates to business transactions only and a sum of Rs.11 lakhs has already been transferred to the account of informant by the accused applicant. It is lastly submitted that applicant has no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for. 4. Per contra learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for bail and admits that the informant has received a sum of Rs.11 lakhs in his account. Learned counsel for the informant submits that some amount has also been Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rakesh Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Archana Tiwari, Atul Pandey, G.A. Rishabh Chaudhary .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) received by the applicant by the informant in cash but he has no reliable evidence regarding this fact. 5. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid 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 with the following conditions that:- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC/269 of BNS. (iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 of BNSS is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC/209 of BNS. (v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge BAIL No. 25361 of 2025 2 and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 of BNSS If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 6. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 7. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. September 9, 2025 RA BAIL No. 25361 of 2025 3 (Santosh Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAZIQ ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad