HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12763 of 2026 Court No. - 70 HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J. List has been revised. No one has appeared on behalf of the informant. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 492 of 2025, under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(4), 340(2), 61(2) BNS, Police Station Madiyahu, District Jaunpur, during the pendency of the trial. Learned counsel for applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the subject case. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R and his name has surfaced in the confessional statement of co- accused. It is next submitted that applicant is only marginal witness of the said sale deed. Charge sheet has already been submitted. Other co- accused of the applicant have already granted interim protection in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition Nos. 28054 of 2025, 29174 of 2025 and 10308 of 2026. Learned counsel submits that applicant has not committed the alleged crime. At this stage, there is no credible evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Criminal history of the applicant has been explained in parar '22' of the bail application. Applicant is in jail since 26.2.2026. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that if Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kamlesh Kumar Tiwari, Sanjay Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Rahul Singh Yadav, Rama Shanker Gaya Prasad Vishwakarma .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse liberty of bail and is ready to co-operate in the trial. 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. 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 and his name was disclosed in the confessional statement of the co-accused. At this stage there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Co- accused of the applicant has already granted interim protection by this Court. Further, the applicant has remained confined for more than six 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-Gaya Prasad Vishwakarma, 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 8, 2026 Brijesh BAIL No. 12763 of 2026 2 (Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.) Digitally signed by :- BRIJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad