Shiv Shanker Prasad, J.

1. Heard Mr. Rahul Pandey and Mr. Rang Nath Pandey, counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the entire material available on record.

2. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Abdul Rashid Ansari a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Crime No. 54 of 2022, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 and 120-B I.P.C., Police Station-Railbazar, District-Kanpur Nagar during the pendency of trial.

3. As per the allegations in the FIR, the applicant in collusion with the co-accused i.e. his brother Abdul Sajid Ansari, is said to have applied for prepaid electricity connection on the basis of fake documents and the applicant and the co-accused Abdul Sajid Ansari are said to have filed a forged affidavit with the electricity department.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. Learned counsel has stated that father of the applicant had remarried and is living separately in his ancestral home and the applicant has been falsely implicated out of vengeance. It is lastly submitted that the co-accused, namely, Abdul Sajid Ansari has already been granted anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 12th October, 2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. 9554 of 2022. The case of the present applicant is more or less identical to that of the aforesaid co-accused. As such the present applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail. The applicant has no previous criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 25th August,2022.

5. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but he could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.

6. Considering the nature of the offence, provision for initiation of cases and release the accused, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Versus State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, [LQ/SC/2018/152] let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

(i) 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. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iii) 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, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iv) 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. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

7. It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.