Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:33632 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34277 of 2024 Applicant :- Sonu Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shobha Vati,Shyam Narayan Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Heard counsel for the applicant, Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State-respondent and perused the record. 2. The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 252 of 2022, under Sections 395, 412 I.P.C., Police Station Lodha, District Aligarh, during the pendency of trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. On the basis of the information furnished by the informer, the applicant along with the co-accused, Sonu Chowdhary was arrested. False recovery of liquor has been shown from a Car, which does not belong to the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. It is next contended that the co-accused, Sonu Chowdhary has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 31.03.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 59322 of 2022 (Sonu Chowdhary vs. State of U.P.). The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para no. 11 of the bail application. The applicant is in jail since 05.11.2023 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 that the applicant was not named in the first information report. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. Identically placed co-accused, Sonu Chowdhary has been granted bail by this Court. At this stage there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Further, the applicant has remained confined for more than one year and four 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 the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant Sonu Sharma, involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy 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; (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. Order Date :- 7.3.2025 Sachin Mishra Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad