HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1245 of 2026 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard Sri Shiv Nath Singh Yadav, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Swapnesh Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri S.S. Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 12 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 111(2)(b) B.N.S. and Section 66D of Information Technology Amendment Act, 2008, Police Station- Cyber Crime Fatehgarh, District- Farrukhabad, during pendency of the trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The name of the applicant has been disclosed by the co-accused Krishna Mohan Pandey @ Rajan Pandey while in police custody. The said statement, insofar as it implicates the applicant is unreliable. False recovery of a mobile phone and Rs.600/- has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The recovered mobile phone and the Indian currency do not link the applicant with any offence. No amount relating to the aforesaid transactions has been credited to the bank account of the applicant. The applicant is not the beneficiary of any illicit transaction. The applicant is neither member of any organized crime syndicate nor he acted on behalf of such syndicate. It is next contended that the co-accused Krishna Mohan Pandey @ Rajan Pandey has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 29.9.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.684 of 2026. Applicant claims parity. The applicant is in jail since 26.11.2025 having no criminal history and in Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhishek Kumar, Ashok Kumar Mishra, Shivesh Mishra, Swapnesh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ashwani Urf Sani Kushwaha .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned A.G.A. for the State 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 name of the applicant was disclosed by the co-accused Krishna Mohan Pandey @ Rajan Pandey while in police custody. The co-accused Krishna Mohan Pandey @ Rajan Pandey has been granted bail by this Court. 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 no criminal antecedents and has presently remained confined for more than ten 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 intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant, Ashwani Urf Sani Kushwaha, involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on their 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 Manish Kr BAIL No. 1245 of 2026 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad