HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15373 of 2026 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard, Learned counsel for the applicant, Learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 618 of 2023, under Sections 307, 411 of I.P.C. and 3/25/27 Arms Act, Police Station- Bisrakh, District- Gautam Buddh Nagar. 3. The Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant and the co-accused are said to have fired on the police personnel, however, no police personnel has received any injury. On the contrary, it was the accused applicant and co- accused Sachin Kumar, who were injured in the said incident. The applicant is in jail since 3.8.2023 having criminal history of 19 cases. He further submits that similarly situated co-accused Sachin Kumar has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 2.1.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 47370 of 2023 (Sachin Kumar Vs. State of U.P.). It is further submitted that in case, the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial proceedings. 4. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail. He, however, does not dispute the explanation of the criminal history that has been given by the applicant. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties and perused the record. 6. No police personnel is said to have been injured in the said incident. The applicant although has criminal history of 19 cases but he is said to have implicated in 9 cases on the very same day when he was arrested in the present case. 7. The Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tewari vs. State of U.P. & Another (2020) 11 SCC 648, while considering a challenge to an order granting bail to an accused having several cases against him, has held in paragraph 7 as under : "7. On considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, having regard to the circumstances of this case, in our opinion, there has been no wrong or improper exercise of discretion on the part of the High Court in granting bail to the accused. The factors outlined in Mahipal v. Rajesh Kumar, Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajendra Kumar Pandey, Smt. Kirti Pandey, Vinay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Naushad .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) (2020) 2 SCC 118 for testing the legality of an order granting bail are absent in the order Vikram Singh v. State of U.P., 2019 SCC OnLine All 5566 impugned. The materials available do not justify arriving at the conclusion that the order impugned suffers from non-application of mind or the reason for granting bail is not borne out from a prima facie view of the evidence on record. The offence alleged no doubt is grave and serious and there are several criminal cases pending against the accused. These factors by themselves cannot be the basis for refusal of prayer for bail. The High Court has exercised its discretion in granting bail to the accused Vikram Singh upon considering relevant materials. No ex facie error in the order has been shown by the appellant which would establish exercise of such discretion to be improper. We accordingly sustain the order Vikram Singh v. State of U.P., 2019 SCC OnLine All 5566 of the High Court granting bail. This appeal is dismissed. 8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances, period of detention of the applicant, which is running into more than 2 years and the fact that no police personnel has been received any injury, I deem it fit to enlarge the applicant on bail. 9. The bail application is allowed. 10. Let the accused-applicant- Naushad, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions: i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence. ii. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity. iii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial. iv. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned. 11. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail. 12. It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of computer generated copy of this order, downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad and verified by the concerned counsel with the undertaking that the certified copy will be filed within 15 days. 13. It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release order to the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to ensure early release of the applicant. May 6, 2026 Fahad BAIL No. 15373 of 2026 2 (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad