HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9370 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.285 of 2025 under Section 105, 281 BNS, Police Station Khairabad, District Sitapur. In the prosecution case it is alleged that on the night of 13/14.08.2025, the husband of the informant was returning to his village in an e-rickshaw bearing registration number UP 34 BH 9664, which was being driven by the applicant Sarvesh. It is further alleged that the deceased and the applicant were in a highly intoxicated condition. The e-rickshaw was being driven negligently and about 150 meters from Gauriya Centre, met with an accident. At the said place, there was about half a foot of water. It is alleged that if the accused had saved her husband or informed someone, his life could have been saved. Postmortem was conducted thereafter. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has not committed any offence. It is argued that there is no eyewitness account against the applicant. Nothing has been recovered from him. He was not subjected to medical examination, and no trace of intoxication has been found either in the applicant or in the deceased which is evident from the postmortem report. The postmortem report records the cause of death as ?asphyxia due to antemortem drowning. Hence, the applicant cannot be Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pradeep Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ram Asarey @ Pattey .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko .....Opposite Party(s) held responsible for the death of the deceased. The co-accused Sarvesh alias Mataru has been granted bail vide order dated 16.9.2025 passed in Bail No.8874 of 2025. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty so granted. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not deny the fact that there is no evidence on record to substantiate the allegation of intoxication of either the applicant or the deceased. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record. On due consideration of the submissions advanced and taking note of the fact that it is a case of circumstantial evidence with no eyewitness to the incident; prima facie chain of circumstances does not appear to be complete, coupled with the fact that the postmortem report does not indicate any intoxication as alleged in the FIR; the bail order of co-accused, referred to above, the applicant has not been subjected to medical examination so as to corroborate the prosecution story; the applicant is in jail since 19.08.2025 and undertakes to cooperate in the investigation as well as in the trial; and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Ram Asaray alias Pattay, be released on bail in aforesaid first information report number subject to his 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 applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. BAIL No. 9370 of 2025 2 (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 of the IPC (now Section 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 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 of the IPC (now Section 209 BNS). September 25, 2025 kkb/ BAIL No. 9370 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench