HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33854 of 2026 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party, and perused the records. 2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 157 of 2026, under Sections 191(2), 118(4), 131, 352, 110, 351(2), 105 B.N.S., Police Station Koraon, District Prayagraj during the pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per the allegations contained in the first information report, the applicant along with five accused is alleged to have assaulted the informant, his wife, son and daughter in-law. The wife of the informant succumbed to her injuries. As per the postmortem report, the deceased sustained four injuries. In the opinion of the doctor, the cause of death was coma due to ante mortem head injuries. In the statement of the son of the informant (injured), specific role of assault has been assigned to co-accused Mithun @ Manik Chandra. Vague and general allegations have been levelled against the applicant. At this stage there is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Identically placed co-accused Tarachandra and Shankar Lal have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 12.08.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.23908 of 2026. The applicant claims parity. The applicant is in jail since 29.05.2026 having no criminal history and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Apurva Prakash Tiwari, Ramanuj Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Kanhaiya Lal @ Lallu .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that as per the allegations contained in the first information report, the applicant along with five accused is alleged to have assaulted the informant, his wife, son and daughter in-law. In the statement of the son of the informant (injured), specific role of assault has been assigned to co-accused Mithun @ Manik Chandra. Vague and general allegations have been levelled against the applicant. At this stage there is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Co-accused Tarachandra and Shankar Lal have already been granted bail by this Court. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for more than three months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, and 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, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant- Kanhaiya Lal @ Lallu, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of 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; and, (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 23, 2026 Abhishek BAIL No. 33854 of 2026 2 (Vivek Varma, J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad