HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4977 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record. 2. The accused-applicant seeks bail in FIR/Case Crime No.0045 of 2024 under section 323, 504, 304 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Dehat, District Hardoi. 3. In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that the informant aged about 46 years was quite unwell and when the informant asked his mother and the applicant, who is the younger brother, to get the treatment of the informant done, both of them refused and on 19.01.2024 when the informant was siting, at about 6.00 pm, in front of a fire after being enveloped in blanket and asked for food, both of them - the mother and the applicant, hurled abuses and pushed him towards fire, because of which he was scorched by the flames and his hands and feet were bunt. Subsequently, the informant was admitted in the hospital and died on account of the burn injuries. 4. The postmortem report on record indicates superficial deep burn injuries on lower part of the leg. The cause of death is also ante-mortem burn injuries. The dying declaration of the informant was recorded wherein it was stated that the mother of the deceased as well as the applicant set his bed afire, on which, the informant was sleeping. It was stated that the said act was done, to save the land dispute that was existing. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Radhika Varma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Raghuveer @ Ragghu .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) 5. In the light of the said, the submission of the counsel for the applicant is that the dying declaration on record is at variance with the FIR allegations and are not even supported by the postmortem report. In the dying declaration, it was stated that the bed was put on fire, whereas the postmortem and the FIR version, indicate that the informant was pushed because of which, he sustained burn injuries on the lower part of the legs, as is evident from the postmortem report. 6. It is further argued that the co-accused who is the mother has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 08.10.2025 passed in Bail No.9462 of 2024 mainly on the ground that she is a lady aged about 68 years. 7. Considering the dying declaration, not being corroborated by the postmortem report and the huge variance in the FIR allegation lodged by the informant itself, a case for bail is made out more so when the applicant is in custody since 28.01.2024 and has no criminal history. Thus the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant Raghuveer @ Ragghu be released on bail in aforesaid FIR/Case Crime Number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the 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. November 15, 2025 VNP/- BAIL No. 4977 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- VISHVANATH PRASAD SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench