HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1745 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and learned counsel for the complainant. Counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for the complainant is taken on record. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that several sale deeds were executed by the applicant and the co-accused persons, asserting ownership and title over the land situated at Khasra No. 500, despite the fact that compensation for the said land had already been received by the parents of the accused after its acquisition. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant seeks parity with co-accused Guddan Devi, who has been granted bail vide order dated 02.09.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8279 of 2025. It is further submitted that co-accused Guddan Devi is the mother of the present applicant, and the land in question was originally recorded in the name of her husband, late Ram Charan. After his demise, the land was mutated in the name of Guddan Devi and subsequently in the name of the applicant in the revenue records. It has also been submitted that the other co-accused persons, namely Manoj Kumar Yadav and Shiv Kumar Yadav @ Guddu, have already been granted Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jagdeshwar Prasad Yadav, Akash Dhar Dubey, Mohd. Taufiq Siddiqui, Priyanka Gupta, Surendra Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Abhishek Misra Rakesh Yadav @ Rakesh Kumar Yadav .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) bail vide orders dated 07.08.2025 and 25.09.2025 respectively, passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 7337 of 2025 and 9023 of 2025. It is further contended that the offences alleged are triable by a Magistrate, the charge sheet has been filed, and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant incarcerated any longer. Learned AGA and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail application. Perused the record and also the bail order of co-accused Guddan Devi. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, particularly that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, the offences are triable by a Magistrate, and co-accused Guddan Devi, Manoj Kumar Yadav, and Shiv Kumar Yadav @ Guddu have already been granted bail, and further, the applicant is languishing in jail since 16.01.2025, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed on the ground of parity. Let the applicant Rakesh Yadav @ Rakesh Kumar Yadav involved in Case Crime No.22 of 2023 under Sections 323/506/504/471/468/467/420/406 I.P.C. registered at Police Station- Chinhat, District- Lucknow, 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (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 him 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 he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are BAIL No. 1745 of 2025 2 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 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him in accordance with law. (vi) 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. (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 him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC (now Section 209 of BNS). It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial. November 7, 2025 R.C. BAIL No. 1745 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench