HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3252 of 2026 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Case called out in the revised list. Counsel for the informant is not present. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri N.K.Sharma, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 3. The present bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 296 of 2025, under Sections 305, 331(4), 317(2) BNS, Police Station Tharvai, District Prayagraj during the pendency of trial. 4. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report. The applicant was arrested on 24.11.2025 and has been falsely implicated in the present case. False recovery of a country made pistol, two live cartridges, 24 mobile phones, a mobile charger and Indian currency of Rs. 1,745/- has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The recovered mobile phones and Indian currency cannot be connected with the offence. At this stage, there is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraph 3 of the supplementary affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 25.11.2025 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 5. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail. He submits that the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kishan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Amar Jeet, G.A. Monu Pal .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) applicant has criminal antecedents. 6. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that there is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. At this stage, there is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the offence. 7. In so far as criminal antecedents of the applicant is concerned, it is not the case of the State that applicant might tamper with or otherwise adversely influence the investigation, or that he might intimidate witnesses before or during the trial. The State has also not placed any material that applicant in past attempted to evade the process of law. In the opinion of this Court if the accused is otherwise found to be entitled to bail, he cannot be denied bail only on the ground of criminal history, no exceptional circumstances on the basis of criminal antecedents have been shown to deny bail to accused, hence, the Court does not feel it proper to deny bail to the applicant just on the ground that he had criminal antecedent. 8. In Ash Mohammad Vs. Shiv Raj Singh, (2012) 9 SCC 446, the Apex Court in para 30 has observed:- "We may hasten to add that when we state that the accused is a history-sheeter we may not be understood to have said that a history-sheeter is never entitled to bail. But, it is a significant factor to be taken note of regard being had to the nature of crime in respect of which he has been booked." 9. In the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2020 (11) SCC 648, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused may itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail. 10. Further, the applicant has remained confined for more than five months and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial and without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 11. Let the applicant Monu Pal, involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties (in view BAIL No. 3252 of 2026 2 of criminal history) 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; and (iv) shall appear on first Sunday of every month at the Police Station concerned. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. May 5, 2026 Lbm/- BAIL No. 3252 of 2026 3 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- LAL BAHADUR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad