Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:28280 Court No. - 29 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2924 of 2025 Applicant :- Shiv Prasad Maurya Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Maurya,Priyanshi Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Heard Ms. Priyanshi Maurya, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in FIR/ Case Crime No. 79 of 2025, under section 105 of BNS, P.S.- Unchahar, District - Raebareli. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated. She submits that the recovery memo is evident that no electric shock machine was recovered from the possession of the applicant. She next submits that the electric wires 33 and 1/2 feet is said to be recovered though there is no independent public eye witness of the same. He next added that it is not evident from any of the record that the dead body was recovered from the field of the applicant. She submitted that the applicant is astonished that how his name has been placed in the FIR though he has never committed any offence. Further argued that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and there is no previous criminal history of the applicant, who is languishing in jail since 08.03.2025 and there seems to be no possibility that the trial would be concluded in near future and there is a still possibility of his reform 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. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is named in the FIR and injury report supports the version of the prosecution as the death of the applicant is due to injury inflicted on the body of the injured by electrocution burn. He also added that some electric wires were also recovered from the place of occurrence and thus the applicant is not entitled for any relief. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that there is no recovery of electric shock machine from the possession of the applicant. Further, there is no recovery of the electric wires from the field of the applicant. This Court has also noticed the fact that there is no proof or record collected by the Investigating Officer that the body was found lying in the field of the applicant. Further the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 08.03.2025 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. 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. Let the applicant, Shiv Prasad Maurya, 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. In case of his absence, without sufficient 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.; and (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. 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. 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. Order Date :- 14.5.2025 Mohd. Sharif Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench