HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28551 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Suresh Singh, holding brief of Ms. Smita Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Mithilesh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 114 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 109, 110, 352 of BNS, Police Station Sen Paschim Para, District Kanpur Nagar, during the pendency of trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. 5. Learned counsel has next stated that there are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons including the applicant. In all, 12 persons were named in the FIR and other unknown persons were also mentioned in it but name of the applicant has come in the supplementary statement of the informant recorded under section 180 BNSS as an afterthought. 6. The criminal history assigned to the applicant has been explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 09.06.2025 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) : Smita Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Mithilesh Kumar Shukla Bhola Yadav Alias Ashok Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 7. Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the injured person has nominated the applicant, as such the applicant is not entitled for bail. 8. In the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648, the Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused by itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record and taking into consideration the fact that there are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons, 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- Bhola Yadav Alias Ashok Yadav, 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. 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 10, 2025 Sumit S BAIL No. 28551 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad