HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31568 of 2026 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State-opposite party. Perused the material available on record. 2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 360 of 2026, under Sections 303(2), 317(2), 317(4), 111(2)(b), 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station- Kotwali, District- Azamgarh, during the pendency of the trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant was not named in the first information report. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 01.07.2026, whereas the first information report was lodged on 06.07.2026. The inordinate delay in lodging the first information report is fatal to the prosecution case. On the basis of information furnished by informer, three persons were arrested. One of the co-accused Mohd. Mizan thereafter disclosed the name of the applicant and four others. False recovery of 36 batteries and 8 E-rickshaws has been shown at the pointing out of the applicant and other accused persons. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The recovered batteries and E-rickshaws cannot be linked with the alleged offence. The applicant is neither a member of any organized crime syndicate nor he acted on behalf of such syndicate. Further, identically placed co-accused Brijesh Kumar Gupta has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 31.8.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.30496 of 2026. Applicant claims parity. Criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraph-31 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 07.07.2026. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Raghvendra Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Yogeshwar Jaiswal .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) liberty. 4. Learned AGA for the State opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 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 first information report has been lodged belatedly. The name of the applicant surfaced during the course of investigation. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. Further, identically placed co-accused Brijesh Kumar Gupta has been granted bail by this Court. Moreover, the applicant has 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 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. 6. Let the applicant- Yogeshwar Jaiswal, 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. 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. September 8, 2026 Manish Kr BAIL No. 31568 of 2026 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad