HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32639 of 2026 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. In re: Criminal Misc. Amendment Application No. 1 of 2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. Perused the bail rejection order dated 10.08.2026. 2. The amendment application is allowed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant shall carry out necessary amendment during the course of the day. In re: Memo of Bail Application 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shashank Shekhar Pandey, learned learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the record. 2. The present bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 427 of 2026, under Sections 316(2), 317(2), 317(5), 111(4), 317(4), 61(2) B.N.S., Police Station- Sikandrarau, District- Hathras during pendency of the trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 21.6.2026, whereas the first information report was lodged on 23.6.2026. The delay in lodging the first information report is fatal to the prosecution case. On the basis of the information furnished by an informer, the applicant was arrested along with five other accused and has been falsely implicated in Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sanjay Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pushpendra .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) the present case. False recovery of copper slabs has been shown from the joint possession of the applicant and other accused. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. At this stage, there is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The applicant is neither a member of any organized crime syndicate nor he acted on behalf of such syndicate. The applicant is in jail since 25.7.2026 having no criminal history. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned A.G.A. for the State 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. His name surfaced during the course of investigation. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. At this stage, there is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Further, the applicant has presently remained confined for more than two 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 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- Pushpendra, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: i. the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court. 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. September 30, 2026 SKT/- BAIL No. 32639 of 2026 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad