Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:22283 Court No. - 5 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4959 of 2025 Applicant :- Durga Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Nayanshri T. Srivastava,Sudhanshu Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kameshwar Singh Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J. Matter is taken up in the revised call. By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 73 of 2024 at Police Station- Ghazipur, District- Fatehpur, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 323, 324 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 08.04.2024. The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 10.01.2025. The following arguments made by Ms. Tanya Makker, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Kameshwar Singh, learned counsel for the informant and Shri Suchit Tandon, learned AGA from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail: 1. As per the prosecution case set out in the FIR five nominated accused had assaulted the deceased and caused his death. 2. The applicant was not named in the FIR. 3. The applicant was subsequently nominated in the statement of some witnesses. The said statement was unreliable for various reasons. There was no cause for failure of the said witness to promptly inform the police about the complicity of the applicant. 4. The applicant has been nominated at the instigation of inimical parties. 5. One weapon of assault was planted on the applicant to burnish the credentials of the police authorities. There is no independent witness to the recovery. 6. The recovered article cannot be connected with the offence. 7. Role of the applicant is distinguishable from the co- accused whose bail application has been rejected and who has been named in the FIR. 8. Prosecution evidence does not connect the applicant with the offence. 9. The applicant claims congruency in role and seeks parity in relief granted to the co-accused Arvind Pal who has been enlarged on bail by this Court by order dated 13.08.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 28913 of 2024. 10. The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case. 11. The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to join the trial proceedings. There is no possibility of her influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending. In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant- Durga Devi be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial. (ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. The learned trial court is directed to fix the sureties after due application of mind in light of the judgement rendered by this Court in Arvind Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. (Application U/S 482 No.2613 of 2023). The learned trial court shall ensure that the right of bail of the applicant granted by this Court is not frustrated by arbitrary demands of sureties or onerous conditions which are unrelated to the socioeconomic status of the applicant. Order Date :- 17.2.2025 Vandit Digitally signed by :- VANDIT AGRAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad