HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33987 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Sri Praveen Kumar Srivastava, Advocate, has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of the informant. The same is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party, and Sri Praveen Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant. 3. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicants on bail in Case No. 24535 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 191 of 2021, under Sections 149, 304 I.P.C., Police Station Mujariya, District Budaun during the pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. In the alleged incident Dinesh died. As per the post-mortem report, no external injury was found on the body of the deceased. The cause of death could not be ascertained and the viscera was sent for chemical examination. As per the FSL report, no poison was found. Further, the wife of the informant received a single injury, which was simple in nature. It is next contended that co-accused Pailadi @ Prahaladi has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 19.10.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 21944 of 2022, Pailadi @ Prahaladi v. State of U.P.. The applicants claim parity. The applicants are in jail since 02.09.2025 having no criminal history and if they are released on bail, they will not misuse the said liberty. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ravi Shankar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Vijay Pal And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 5. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that as per the post-mortem report, no external injury was found on the body of the deceased, the cause of death could not be ascertained and the viscera was sent for chemical examination; as per the FSL report, no poison was found; the wife of the informant received a single injury, which was simple in nature; and, co- accused Pailadi @ Prahaladi has been granted bail by this Court. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. Moreover, the applicants have remained confined for more than one month and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, and no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicants, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on bail. 7. Let the applicants- Vijay Pal and Indrapal, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that they: (i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and, (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. October 7, 2025 SKT/- BAIL No. 33987 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad