JUDGMENT Bachchoo Lal, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is not named in the FIR and the injured Sarad Kumar Mishra has not disclosed the name of the applicant. In his statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. only he has disclosed the names of co-accused Chandra Shekhar @ Shekhar and Jalau. The co-accused Mulayam Singh Yadav and Diwakar having identical role have already been released on bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.5.2015 and 27.4.2015 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.s 16685 of 2015 and 12988 of 2015, respectively. Therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 23.2.2015. 3. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail. Having given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. 4. Let the applicant-Aruna @ Guddu Yadav, involved in Case Crime No. 2987/2014, under sections 396, 412, 120B IPC, police station Kotwali District Jaunpur, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions : 1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidences. 2. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate with the trial. 3. The applicant will appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned. 5. In case of breach of any conditions mentioned above, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.