JUDGMENT : Shree Prakash Singh, J. 1.Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant as well as A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 61 of 2023, under sections 420, 406, 506, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC , P.S.- Indira Nagar, District - Lucknow. 3. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that the only allegation against the applicant is that on the instance of him, the complainant has given some amount to Virender Kumar/co-accused who later on died. He added that there is no documentary proof with respect to any amount given to the present applicant and further submits that there was some dispute in between the parties which is being given colour of criminality and there was no criminal intent to commit any offence as is alleged in the first information report. He added that the applicant has two cases criminal history which has been explained and the applicant is languishing in jail since 31.8.2024 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. 4. Further submitted that the identically situated co-accused namely, Krishna Kumar Singh @ Guru, has already been enlarged on bail by this court vide order dated 18-10-2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 10935 of 2024 and the applicant is seeking parity of the same. 5. Learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that Rs. 10,35,000/- has been in- credited in the account of the present applicant and he has misappropriated the same and has committed cheat & fraud as such, he is not entitled for any relief. 6. Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has supported the contentions of counsel for the complainant, but, he could not dispute the fact that the identically situated co-accused named above, has already been enlarged on bail by this court. 7. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that an amount of Rs. 7. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that an amount of Rs. 10,35,000/- was given by the complainant to one Virendra Kumar (dead) though, prima facie there is no documentary evidence of the same. This Court has taken note of fact that there is no independent eye witness with respect to the action of the present applicant, while directing the complainant to give amount to one Virender Kumar. This Court has also noticed the fact that there are two cases criminal history against the applicant which has been explained and he is languishing in jail since 31.8.2024 coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. 8. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. 9. Let the applicant- Ranjeet Pandey, involved in the aforementioned crime 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 shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) 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 court. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code ; (3) 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 313 Cr.P.C.; (4) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code . 10. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. 11. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.