HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9088 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State. 2. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 03.05.2025, at about 11:15 p.m., the complainant's son, aged 23 years, was assaulted at his clinic by several persons armed with lathi and danda owing to previous enmity. He sustained serious injuries and was taken to the District Hospital, Barabanki, where he was declared dead. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the FIR, ten named and some unknown persons were attributed the role of assaulting the deceased with lathi and danda, however, the applicant was not named therein. Even in the statement of the complainant recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the applicant was not named. The sole eye-witness, Vivek Chandra Nag, also did not mention the applicant in his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. It is only after four days of the incident, the investigating officer introduced the applicant?s name on the basis of CCTV footage allegedly seen by some unknown informer, without any corroborative evidence. A country-made pistol is further shown to have been recovered from the applicant, though no independent public witness has been cited to support the recovery. It is further contended that the alleged recovery does not connect the applicant with the incident, as the deceased suffered six antemortem injuries, none of which are firearm injuries. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that co-accused Ram Shukla has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 17.9.2025 passed in Criminal Misc Bail Application No.8886 of 2025, therefore, he seeks parity with the said co-accused. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Nisha Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ajay Kumar Verma .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) 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, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute that it is a case of parity. 7. Having considered the facts that the applicant is not named in the FIR, nor in the statement of the complainant under Section 161 Cr.P.C., nor by the sole eye-witness; the injuries sustained by the deceased do not corroborate the alleged recovery, the role assigned to the applicant appears distinct from that of the named accused persons and coupled with the fact that the applicant is in custody since 10.05.2025 and has no criminal antecedents, this Court finds it to be a fit case for granting bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed on the ground of parity. 9. Let the applicant Ajay Kumar Verma involved in Case Crime No.190/2025, U/s-3(5) and 103(2) of B.N.S., Police Station-Masauli, District-Barabanki, 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 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 in accordance with law. BAIL No. 9088 of 2025 2 (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 22, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S BAIL No. 9088 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench