HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26615 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party, and Sri Satya Narayan Gupta, learned counsel for the informant. 3. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 535 of 2025, under Sections 127(2), 119(1), 115(2), 351(3), 111 B.N.S., Police Station Kotwali Lalitpur, District Lalitpur during the pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per the first information report, the applicant along with named co-accused Mohasin Quraishi and 2-3 unknown persons assaulted the son of the informant and demanded Rs.10,000/- from him. As per the medical report, the injuries received by the injured were simple in nature. In the statement of the injured four more persons were nominated in the alleged incident. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. It is next contended that the applicant is not a member of any organized crime syndicate nor he acted on behalf of such syndicate. The alleged video footage does not connect the applicant with the offence. The investigation has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in Paragraph- 15 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 12.05.2025 and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Nanhe Lal Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Satya Narayan Gupta Suraj Alias Fulla .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 5. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that as per the medical report, the injuries received by the injured were simple in nature, a vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant and the alleged video footage does not connect the applicant with the offence. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for more than four months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, and 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, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 7. Let the applicant- Suraj @ Fulla, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of 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; and, (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. October 7, 2025 SKT/- BAIL No. 26615 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad