HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7596 of 2023 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1.Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record. 2.It is alleged in the prosecution case that on 9.5.2022 at about 10.00 in the night, Bhola came to the house of the complainant and asked his son Jai Prakaksh Mishra for going Babu Bind Marriage Lawn in a party. Both went from home, however, instead of going to marriage lawn, they went to on Nighasan road on motorcycle. Suspecting them, the informant chased them. After some time, Bhola stopped his motorcycle. Vinai Balmiki and Varun were having knife and Deepak present applicant was having fire arm and other accused persons made deadly assault on him. Two persons are alleged to have fired due to which, the deceased died. On an alarm being raised, the accused ran away. 3.Learned counsel for the applicant has invited attention of this court towards statement of the complainant Raj Kumar Mishra wherein role of firing has been assigned to the accused applicant as well as co-accused Arjun who has been granted bail vide order contained in Annexure No.SA-2 to the supplementary affidavit. The deceased suffered injury No.1 as fire arm injury. Cause of death is ante morrtem injury in the post mortem report. It is submitted that one more co-accused Vinay, who was assigned the role of causing punctured wound has been granted bail vide order Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Suyesh Pradhan, Arvind Kumar Verma, Atul Verma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Rajiva Dubey Deepak .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Secrt. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) contained in Annexure SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit filed today which is taken on record. It is submitted that two persons have been assigned the role of causing fire arm injury, i.e. injury No.1 to the deceased. The role of both the above co-accused persons are similar except the weapon of assault. The applicant is entitled to be given parity with the bail order of Arjun who has been assigned the role of causing fire arm injury. The applicant has explained criminal history of one case in the rejoinder affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 10.5.2021. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. 4.Learned A.G.A. and complainant's counsel opposed the prayer for bail. The complainant's counsel has submitted that four prosecution witnesses have been examined before the trial court. It is a heinous offence. The trial is liable to be expedited. 5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the co-accused named above, particularly the co-accused Arjun who was assigned similar role to that of the applicant has been granted bail, the applicant is in jail for the last more than three years and three months, out of 34, only 4 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far, trial appears to be going on a slow pace, the judgment in Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh versus State of Maharashtra and another Crl. Appeal No.2787 of 2024, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the period for which the applicant is in jail and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. 6.Let the applicant Deepak, involved in Case Crime No.486 of 2022 under sections 302, 34 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Sadar, district Lakhimpur Kheri, 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 which are being imposed in the interest of BAIL No. 7596 of 2023 2 justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iv) 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. (v) 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 I.P.C. (now 269 BNS) (vi) 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. (now 84 BNSS) 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 I.P.C. (now 209 BNS). 7.The application is allowed accordingly, on the ground of parity of co- accused Arjun. September 1, 2025 kkb/ BAIL No. 7596 of 2023 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench