Grant of bail based on the principle of parity when the role of the applicant is not distinguishable from co-accused who have already been granted bail by the court.

1. Heard Sri Ashutosh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Radhey Shyam, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.

2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 76 of 2026, under Sections 318(4), 351(3), 336, 338, 340, 341, 3(5) and 61(2) BNS and Section 66D of IT Act, registered at Police Station AIIMS, District Gorakhpur, during pendency of the trial.

3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case and he has been languishing in jail since 23.3.2026. It is further submitted that co-accused Dhruv Sahni and Akhand Pratap Singh@Vikki Singh have already been granted bail by this Court and the role of the applicant is not distinguishable from the role of co-accused Dhruv Sahni. It is also submitted that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant.

5. Co-accused Dhruv Sahni and Akhand Pratap Singh@Vikki Singh have already been granted bail by this Court and the role of the applicant is not distinguishable from the role of co-accused Dhruv Sahni and as per FIR the bank account of the first informant was being operated by co-accused Dhruv Sahni and he was having cheque book and ATM card in his possession and the bank account of the first informant is said to have been freezed by the Bank.

6. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail. Hence, the present bail application is ALLOWED

7. Let the applicant- Suraj Singh involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions :-

(i) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

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

(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of B.N.S.S.

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court.

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.

8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

9. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.