HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31595 of 2026 Court No. - 70 HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 219 of 2025, under Sections 310(2), 317(3), 317 (4) of BNS, Police Station Puramufti, District Prayagraj, during the pendency of the trial. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused-applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was not named in the FIR. Charge sheet in this case has already been filed. Further custodial interrogation of the applicant is no more required. It is next submitted that co-accused of the applicant namely Abhishek Kumar @ Sonu and Babu Pasi @ Omi Pasi have already enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench as well as by this Court vide order dated 26.05.2026 and 9.7.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 16079 of 2026 (Abhishek Kumar @ Sonu vs. State of U.P.) and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 22226 of 2026, respectively. Criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 14 of the instant bail application. Applicant is in jail since 22.12.2025. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that if the applicant is released on bail on the ground of parity, he would not misuse liberty of bail and is ready to co-operate in the trial. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Kumar Srivastava, Atul Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ankit Pasi .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Learned A.G.A. for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is no illegality in the bail rejection order, but could not dispute the fact that similarly placed co-accused of the applicant have already granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench as well as by this Court. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that a vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant was not named in the FIR. At this stage there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Co- accused of the applicant have already granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Further, the applicant has remained confined for more than eight 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 delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Bail Application is allowed. Let the applicant-Ankit Pasi, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties 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. 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 9, 2026 Brijesh BAIL No. 31595 of 2026 2 (Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.) Digitally signed by :- BRIJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad