BAIL/12929/2026 of BHAIRAV PRASAD PATHAK Vs STATE OF U.P. on 7 September 2026

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12929 of 2026 Court No. - 70 HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J. 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. 286 of 2024, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC, Police Station Jhangha, District Gorakhpur, 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. It is submitted that applicant was neither executed gift deed in favour of Keshav Pathak nor received any consideration. It is submitted that in other similar case, the applicant has also enlarged on bail. At this stage, there is no credible evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 15 of the bail application. Applicant is in jail since 23.07.2024. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that if 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. At this stage there is no substantive evidence to link the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sudhir Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Bhairav Prasad Pathak .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s)

applicant with the offence. Trial is still pending. Further, the applicant has remained confined for more than two years 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-Bhairav Prasad Pathak, 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. It is further directed that the trial court shall conclude the trial of the case, strictly in view of the provisions of Section 309 Cr.P.C., as expeditiously as possible, from the date of production of this order, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, if there is no legal impediment. September 8, 2026 Brijesh BAIL No. 12929 of 2026 2 (Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.) Digitally signed by :- BRIJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad