HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10167 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Supplementary Affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.290 of 2025 under Section 61(2), 316(5), 318(4), 351(3) BNS, Police Station Mohanlalganj, District Lucknow. In the prosecution case it is alleged that the informant purchased a plot No.C-89 for consideration amount of Rs.7,65,000 lacs/-, however, even after execution of the registered sale deed in the year 2017, possession has not been given to the informant. Upon being demanded the possession, the informant was threatened by the accused applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a lady, and the dispute is primarily civil in nature. It is further submitted that the applicant has explained her criminal history in paragraph 14 of the bail application. The co-accused Prabhat Kumar Upadhyay has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 26.09.2025, and the applicant, therefore, claims parity. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Virendra Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Seema Upadhyay .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko .....Opposite Party(s) fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute that it is a case of parity. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record. On due consideration to the facts that the applicant has been in jail since 23.07.2025; the alleged offence is triable by a Magistrate; the co-accused Prabhat Kumar Upadhyay has already been granted anticipatory bail; the applicant is a lady; and she has explained her criminal history in paragraph 14 of the bail application, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for being enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed on the ground of parity. Let the applicant Seema Upadhyay be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number subject to her furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below concerned with the following conditions: (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurize or intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (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 such person from disclosing those 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 she 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 BAIL No. 10167 of 2025 2 for the trial court to treat it as an abuse of the 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 her counsel. In case of her absence without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the IPC (now Section 269 BNS). (vi) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during the trial and, in order to secure her 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 her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the IPC (now Section 209 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 6, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S BAIL No. 10167 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench