Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:4945 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13218 of 2024 Applicant :- Anantram Yadav Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Tiwari,Mohsin Iqbal,Vivek Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kamlesh Kumar Yadav,Susheel Kumar Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Case called out in the revised list. No one is present on behalf of the complainant. Supplementary affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the applicant and counter affidavit filed today by learned Counsel for the State are taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Counsel for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 303 of 2024, under sections 191(2), 118(2), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 117(2), 308(5) of BNS, Police Station Nawabganj, District Gonda. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the incident has taken place due to scuffling in between the parties. The oil, which is allegedly poured upon the complainant not due to deliberate intention but that happened because of the quarrel in between the parties. He next added that both the parties have received burn injuries. There are also superficial burn injuries on the body of the complainant. He next added that there was no intention to commit the offence, as the incident took place due to sudden provocation and hot talk in between the parties. He added that the identically situated co- accused namely, Surendra Yadav has already been enlarged on bail in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11442 of 2024 vide order dated 25.10.2024 and the applicant is seeking parity of the aforesaid order. The applicant has 17 cases criminal history which has been explained in supplementary affidavit. The chargesheet has been filed against the applicant, as such, there is no possibility that he will tamper the evidences. He further submits that the applicant undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is not entitled for any relief as he has committed offence and there is cogent and credible evidence against the applicant, but he could not dispute the fact the identically situated co-accused has already been enlarged on bail. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that incident had taken place due to sudden provocation and hot talk exchanged in between the parties; the applicant is languishing in jail since 05.12.2024; the applicant has 17 cases criminal history which has been explained; identically situated co-accused namely, Surendra Yadav has already been enlarged on bail in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11442 of 2024 vide order dated 25.10.2024 and the applicant is seeking parity of the aforesaid order, coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that if he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant-Anantram Yadav involved in the aforementioned crime 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:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) 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. He 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 Indian Penal Code; (3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and (4) 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. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 24.1.2025 kkv/ Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench