Shivam and Another v. State of UP Thru Its Principal Secratary Home

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26557 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Heard Shri V.P. Singh Kashyap, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Hardev Prajapati, learned counsel for the informant as well as Shri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the record.

¶3Applicants seek bail in Case Crime No.137 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 307 I.P.C., Police Station Sikandarpur Vaishya, District Kasganj, during the pendency of trial.

¶4It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that similarly placed co-accused person, Dharmendra has already been enlarged on bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 1.9.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.29910 of 2025. The applicants are languishing in jail since 9.7.2025. The criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant no.1 has been explained. The applicant no.2 has no criminal antecedent to his credit. He further submitted that since the role of the applicants is identical to that of co-accused, who has already been enlarged on bail, they are also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.

¶5The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned State Law Officer. However, the aforesaid factual aspects of parity to the co-accused have not been disputed by him.

¶6The Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manish Kumar Kashyap, V.P. Singh Kashyap Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Hardev Prajapati Shivam And Another .....Applicant(s) State Of Up Thru Its Principal Secratary Home .....Opposite Party(s) 2020 (11) SCC 648 has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail, if otherwise his case of bail is made out.

¶7Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a case for bail on the ground of parity. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶8Let the applicants-Shivam and Chhatrapal involved in aforementioned case crime number 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 following conditions.

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial.

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

¶9In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶10Identity, status and residence proof of the applicants and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶11It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicants shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion on the testimony of the witnesses. September 26, 2025 Vikas Verma BAIL No. 26557 of 2025 (Krishan Pahal,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad