HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9094 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Shri Subodh Kumar Pandey, leaned Advocate who has filed vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant which is taken on record. 2. The accused-applicants seeks bail in Case Crime No.242 of 2025 under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 105, 352 BNS, Police Station Mailani, District Lakhimpur Kheri. 3. In the prosecution case it is alleged that the elder brother of the informant, Satyram (deceased), was beaten to death by the seven named accused persons on 07.06.2025 at about 10:00 p.m. In the morning, he was taken to Oel Hospital and was thereafter referred to the Trauma Center, Lucknow, where he succumbed to his injuries during treatment. As per the postmortem report, two contusions and four antemortem injuries were found on the body of the deceased. The cause of death has been opined as coma resulting from antemortem head injury. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have no previous criminal history and have been falsely implicated in this case. It is contended that even the six independent witnesses have given verbatim statements, assigning only a general role of beating to all the seven accused persons. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that co-accused Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Suresh Chandra Srivastava, Savita Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Subodh Kumar Pandey Palu @ Rampal And Another .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Ramasrey @ Ram Asery, Pawan Kumar and Saroj Kumar have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 9.9.2025, 16.09.2025 and 22.09.2025 passed in Cri. Misc. Bail Application Nos.8520 of 2025, 8861 of 2025 and 9060 of 2025, therefore he seeks parity with the bail order of said co-accused persons. 6. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail however could not dispute that it is a case of parity. 7. I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. 8. On due consideration to the postmortem report, it is apparent that only two injuries have been found on the body of the deceased, whereas seven accused persons have been named in the FIR with a general allegation of assault; the prosecution case does not clarify which of the accused is specifically responsible for causing the two injuries; the incident appears to have occurred on a trivial issue and all of a sudden, without there being any premeditation or time to cool down; the applicants are in jail since 08.06.2025; the applicants seeks parity with the bail order of co-accused who have already been granted bail by this Court and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicants on bail. 9. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed on the ground of parity. 10. Let the applicants Palu @ Rampal and Ved Prakash, be released on bail in aforesaid first information report number subject to their furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below concerned with the following conditions: (i) The applicants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicants will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicants 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. BAIL No. 9094 of 2025 2 (iv) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the IPC (now Section 269 BNS). (vi) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicants fail 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 IPC (now Section 209 BNS). September 24, 2025 R.C. BAIL No. 9094 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench