HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8785 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 2. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the informant's daughter was married in the year 2024 to Lalu, son of the applicant. Since a motorcycle was not given in dowry, Lalu frequently assaulted the deceased. On 21/22.05.2025, Lalu allegedly beat her and thereafter administered poison, leading to her death. Upon receiving information about the incident, the informant reached the spot and found his daughter's dead body. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. The applicant is not named in the FIR, nor is there any allegation against him in the FIR or in the complainant's statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Subsequently, upon consultation, a re- statement of the complainant was recorded in which general allegations were levelled against the applicant and other family members. However, four independent witnesses of the village have specifically attributed the role to Lalu alone, and not to the present applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant resides separately, which is supported by the photograph and certificate issued by the Gram Pradhan. It is a case of false implication. Since the cause of death could not be ascertained, viscera was preserved during the postmortem examination. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jitendra Prakash Mishra, Kaushal Kishore Tewari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Randheer .....Applicant(s) State Of Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the co-accused Rampa who was assigned similar role has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 04.09.2025 passed in criminal misc. bail application No. 8158 of 2025. Learned counsel for the applicant seeks parity with the order of the co- accused. 5. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, she shall not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant. 7. On due consideration to the facts that co-accused Rampa has been granted bail; the applicant has no criminal antecedents, is an old person, and is languishing in jail since 22.07.2025; and also neither the FIR nor the complainant's first statement contains any allegation, even of a general nature, against him; coupled with the fact that the case of the applicant stands on a different footing from that of Lalu, who is the main accused; and further supported by the statements of independent witnesses as well as the certificate issued by the Gram Pradhan, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed on the ground of parity. 9. Let the applicant Randheer involved in Case Crime No. 215/2025, U/S-80 (2), 85,115(2) of B.N.S. & Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S.- Pihani, District- Hardoi 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 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 BAIL No. 8785 of 2025 2 or tamper with the evidence. (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she 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 in accordance with law. (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 Section 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 IPC (now Section 209 of BNS). 10. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial. September 15, 2025 R.C. BAIL No. 8785 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench