HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8032 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 11.06.2025, the complainant had gone to a temple for darshan, and upon returning, found the lock of his house broken. The belongings were found scattered, and several gold articles along with a 9 mm Glock pistol containing eight cartridges in the magazine were reported stolen. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has explained his criminal history involving 14 cases in paragraph 11 of the bail application. It is further submitted that the alleged recovery of the 9 mm pistol, eight cartridges, and Rs. 9,000/- in cash from the applicant is false, and that there is no independent witness to support the alleged recovery. It is also submitted that the co-accused, Sheeta Prasad, has been granted bail by the lower court vide order dated 30.06.2025 passed in Bail Application No. 4677 of 2025. The charge sheet in the case has already been filed. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application, however, could not dispute the fact that it is a case of parity. Considering the role assigned to the applicant, the absence of any independent witness to the alleged recovery, and the fact that the applicant is in custody since 13.06.2025, this Court finds it to be a fit case for granting Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ram Sahay Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Karan Verma .....Applicant(s) State Of Up Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant involved in Criminal Misc. Case No. 433 of 2025, under Sections 305A, 331(3), and 317(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (B.N.S.), Police Station – Para, 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 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 anticipatory bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial. November 6, 2025R.C. BAIL No. 8032 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench