HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4474 of 2026 Court No. - 75 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second bail application moved on behalf of applicant. The first was rejected by this Court vide 18.08.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 25601 of 2025. It has further been submitted that the offence is triable by Magistrate. The applicant is in jail since 20.11.2023 and till date charge has not been framed as yet. The applicant has also moved an application dated 08.04.2026 before the learned trial court to try his case separately, but nothing has been done. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that trial is progressing at a slow pace and has relied upon the judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Indrani Pratim Mukerjea Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 1627 of 2022 to submit that prolonged incarceration of a person as an under trial is against his fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It is contended that there is no occasion now for the applicant to tamper with any witness or to flee from judicial process. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. It is further contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is languishing in jail since 20.11.2023. 3. Learned A.G.A. for the State could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajeet Shukla, Neelam Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Deepak Shukla .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 4. After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 5. Let the applicant-Deepak Shukla, involved in Case Crime No. 489 of 2020, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Nawabad, District Jhansi, be enlarged on bail, on executing a personal bond and furnishing two local sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions: i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court. iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission. v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 6. In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move appropriate application for cancellation of bail. September 8, 2026 Mustaqeem. BAIL No. 4474 of 2026 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad