HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7690 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. 1. Heard Shri Sanjay Kumar Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State; Shri Vinod Kumar, learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record. 2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.70 of 2025, under Section 103(1), 85, 61(2), 238(A) BNS, P.S. Nagram, District Lucknow. 3. In terms of the FIR it was alleged that niece of the informant was married around 15 years ago to Tilakram, co-accused, and they were blessed with two children. Subsequently, she was being harassed by her husband for property. It was stated that on 16.03.2025, Tilakram alongwith the applicant had gone to a fair and allegations were levelled that the applicant had called for a stick and some wires etc., and both the said accused had beaten up the deceased to death. It was also stated that one driver Santosh Kumar had seen the deceased and the two accused. It was also stated that Santosh Kumar had taken her to the hospital where she died. 4. In the light of the said allegation, submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant was falsely implicated. He draws my attention to the statement of driver Santosh where he stated that he was called by two accused to come to a vehicle because the deceased has suffered an accident. He also stated that both the co-accused had taken her to hospital. Medical certificate/entry to the hospital also indicates that it Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Eshan Kumar Gupta, Sanjay Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rajesh Prajapati .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) was a case of road accident. Postmortem report on record indicates presence of as many as six injuries which are on the right side of head, which are also prima-facie indicative of an accident. No recovery has been affected from the applicant of the alleged weapon. 5. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application. 6. Considering the materials as discussed above, prima-facie, the material to implicate the applicant for the offence under Section 103 BNSS is weak, as such, the applicant who is in custody since 19.03.2025 and has explained his criminal antecedents which are two cases in which the applicant is on bail, is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed. 7. Let the applicant Rajesh Prajapati be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions: (a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings; (b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and (c) 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. December 2, 2025 nishant BAIL No. 7690 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench