HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31780 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State-opposite party. 2. The instant bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.738 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 110, 115(2), 352, 126(2), 105, 140(1) B.N.S., Police Station- Bhojipur, District- Bareilly during the pendency of trial. 3. .Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per the first information report, four named accused are alleged to have assaulted the deceased. The name of the applicant was subsequently disclosed in the statement of the informant under Section 180 of the BNSS. It is contended that the said statement is an afterthought. There is no independent witness to the alleged incident. A vague and general role has been leveled against the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 01.08.2025 having no criminal history and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds the applicant was not named in the first information report. The name of the applicant was subsequently disclosed in the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Akhilesh Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Charan Singh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) statement of the informant under Section 180 of the BNSS. A vague and general role has been leveled against the applicant. Further, the applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant has remained confined for more than two months and after submission of the charge-sheet 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 the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. 6. Let the applicant Charan Singh, 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 the 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. 7. 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 Prachi BAIL No. 31780 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRACHI KESARWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad