HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28914 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Rohit Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.93 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 109, 118(1), 115(2), 351(2) and 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station Govind Nagar, District Mathura, during the pendency of trial. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He was simply a member of unlawful assembly, but there is no overt act assigned to him to indicate that he carried the object to commit the said offence. The allegations are per se false. The main role has been assigned to other co-accused persons. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the FIR is delayed by about nineteen hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The criminal history assigned to the applicant stands explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 01.07.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Garun Pal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Aslam .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 7. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 8. The Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tewari vs. State of U.P. And Another, (2020) 11 SCC 648 has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail, if otherwise his case for bail is made out. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the delay in institution of FIR and there being no overt act assigned to the applicant, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima-facie the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant- Aslam, 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 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. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 12. 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 12, 2025 (Ravi Kant) BAIL No. 28914 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad