HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27678 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. As informed by learned A.G.A., notice to the informant has been served on 08.08.2025 but none is present on behalf of the informant even in the revised call. 2. Heard Sri Srijan Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 43 of 2025, under Sections 351(2) of B.N.S. and Section 3/4(2)/16/17 of POCSO Act, Police Station Loni Border, District Ghaziabad, during the pendency of trial. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused person, Deepak Kasyap, has already been enlarged on bail by the same Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.04.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11047 of 2025. It is further submitted that since the case of the applicant is at par to the co-accused, who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is languishing in jail since 26.02.2025, having no criminal history. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial. 5. The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspects of parity to the co-accused and of no criminal history of the applicant, have not been disputed by him. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Srijan Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Chand Alias Chandu .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) by learned counsel for the parties, evidence on record, pending trial and in the 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 judgement passed by the Supreme Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 coupled with the judgement of Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity. 7. Let the applicant- Chand alias Chandu, 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 the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant 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 applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. September 10, 2025 Sumit S BAIL No. 27678 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad