HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31996 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.313 of 2025, under Sections 303(2), 317(2), 317(4), 317(5) B.N.S. and 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station- Mandi Dhanaura, District- Amroha, 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. A false recovery of seven motorcycles has been foisted on three accused persons including the applicant. The applicant was not named in the instant case. 5. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no test identification parade conducted as per Section 7 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam. The criminal history of two cases assigned to the applicant stands explained as the closure report has been filed in both the cases. The applicant is languishing in jail since 18.7.2025 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) : Sunil Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pawan Kumar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 6. Per contra, learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application. 7. 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 of bail is made out. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the fact that applicant is not named in the FIR and there being no test identification parade conducted as per Section 7 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 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. 9. Let the applicant- Pawan Kumar, 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 pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 11. 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 18, 2025 Vikas Verma BAIL No. 31996 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad