HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14433 of 2026 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V.P. Tripathi, 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. 130 of 2026, under Sections 310(2), 317(3) B.N.S., Police Station- Chakeri, District- Kanpur Nagar 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 taken place on 16.2.2026, whereas the first information report was lodged on 24.2.2026. The inordinate delay in lodging the first information report is fatal to the prosecution case. On the basis of an information furnished by an informer, the applicant was arrested along with co-accused Abdul Rehman and has been falsely implicated in the present case. False recovery of Rs.1,07,000/- and a mobile phone has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. It is contended that the recovered Indian currency and mobile phone do not link the applicant with the alleged offence. The applicant is in jail since 27.2.2026 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 opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohd Mohsin Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Subhan Khan .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 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. The inordinate delay in lodging the first information report is fatal to the prosecution case. On the basis of an information furnished by an informer, the applicant was arrested along with co-accused Abdul Rehman. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. 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, Subhan Khan 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. May 7, 2026 S.S. BAIL No. 14433 of 2026 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad