HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9392 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.28 of 2025 under Section 103(1), 3(5), 61(2) BNS, Police Station Mahrajganj Tarai, District Balrampur. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present case is based on circumstantial evidence. The applicant is not named in the First Information Report. Jitendra Verma is the main accused and, according to his confessional statement, he had planned to eliminate Harindra Verma, the husband of the applicant. It is alleged that the applicant was having an illicit relationship with Jitendra Verma. However, except for the confessional statements of the applicant and co-accused Jitendra Verma, there is no other corroborative material against her. The case, except for call detail records and suspicion, lacks direct evidence. It is further submitted that the cause of death of the deceased is hemorrhage and shock due to antemortem injuries, with eight incised wounds. The applicant is a lady and has no criminal antecedents. She has been in judicial custody since 4.5.2025. Learned counsel also submits that the co-accused persons, namely Akhilesh Yadav, Santosh Kumar, and Mukesh Sahu, have already been granted bail Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dinesh Kr. Chaudhary Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Uma Devi .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) by this Court and by a Coordinate Bench vide orders dated 14.7.2025, 17.7.2025, and 22.8.2025, respectively. Therefore, the applicant seeks parity with the bail granted to the said co-accused persons. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant fleeing or tampering with witnesses. In case she is enlarged on bail, she undertakes not to misuse the liberty of bail. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application and submitted that the applicant spoke to accused Jitendra Verma more than 211 times prior to the death of the deceased, including twice immediately before the incident. Further, the father and uncle of the deceased have raised suspicion against the applicant. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. On due consideration of the facts that the applicant is a lady; there is no direct evidence against her in this case; except for call detail records and the suspicion raised by two prosecution witnesses, there appears to be no other material to implicate the applicant; the co-accused have been granted bail; and the applicant has been in custody since 4.5.2025 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 Uma Devi be released on bail in aforesaid first information report number subject to her 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 shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurize or intimidate the prosecution witnesses. BAIL No. 9392 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 her 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 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 her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A IPC (now Section 269 BNS). (vi) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her 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 her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC (now Section 209 BNS). September 26, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S BAIL No. 9392 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench