Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:19979 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2706 of 2025 Applicant :- Pushpendra Chauhan Alias Bhola Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vishvendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Second supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicant, is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent and perused the record. 3. The instant bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.280 of 2024, under Sections 309(4), 317(2), 61(2Ka) of B.N.S., Police Station Shamshabad, District Agra, during the pendency of trial. 4. Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant was not named in the first information report. On the basis of an information furnished by an informer, the applicant was arrested after 22 days of the alleged incident and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. False recovery of a country made pistol and Rs.45,000/- have been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. At this stage, there is no credible evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The criminal history of the applicant have been explained in paragraph-15 of the bail application and in paragraph-2 of the first supplementary affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 13.12.2024 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid facts from the record. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not named in the first information report. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. At present there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The applicant has remained confined for more almost two 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. 7. Let the applicant, Pushpendra Chauhan Alias Bhola involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: i. the applicant shall not temper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; and, iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court. 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. Order Date :- 11.2.2025 Radhika Digitally signed by :- RADHIKA VISHWAKARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad