HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26762 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Deepak Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicants seek bail in Case Crime No.0129 of 2025, under Sections 3/5A/8 and 5B of Uttar Pradesh Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 and Section 11 of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, Police Station Syed Raza, District Chandauli, during the pendency of trial. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that similarly placed co-accused persons, namely, Kailu Yadav, Upendra Yadav and Arvind Yadav, have already been enlarged on bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 02.09.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.26654 of 2025. There is no criminal history of the applicants. The applicants are languishing in jail since 26.05.2025. He further submitted that since the roles of the applicants are identical to that of co-accused who has already been enlarged on bail, they are also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. In case, the applicants are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail. 5. The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the parity to the co-accused has not Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Deepak Kumar Pandey, Sandeep Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ibraar Ahmad And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) been disputed by him. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and in light of the judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 and the judgements passed by the Supreme Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 and in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigationa and Another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a case for grant of bail on the ground of parity. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity. 7. Let the applicants- Ibraar Ahmad and Sundar Yadav, who are involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on their 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 applicants shall not tamper with evidence during trial. (ii) The applicants shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicants shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 9. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicants shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming their independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. September 10, 2025 (Ravi Kant) BAIL No. 26762 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad