HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10109 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 0222 of 2025, under Sections 3(5), 308(5), 352, 351(3) BNS, Police Station-Patti, District-Pratapgarh. 3. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that a perusal of the FIR No. 0222 of 2025 lodged on 24.07.2025 at P.S.-Patti, District- Pratapgarh, in connection with which the applicant is in jail since 11.08.2025, would indicate that co-accused Sushil Kumar Singh, Block Pramukh is the main accused and not the present applicant. 4. According to the case set up in the FIR, Sushil Kumar Singh, Block Pramukh was trying to pressurize Jagannath Vishwakarma, father of the informant, for selling the property to his known persons on meagre amount and not to Brijesh Tiwari to whom the father of the co-accused Akhilesh Srivastava was intent to sell the property and as such, it can be inferred that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. 5. Further submitted that prior to lodging of FIR No. 0222 of 2025, indicated above, an FIR No. 0219 of 2025 was lodged on 21.07.2025 by one Baikunth Nath Pandey, In-charge Police Station, P.S.-Patti, District-Pratapgarh, the copy of which has been annexed as Annexure No. 4 to the present application and a perusal thereof would show that accused Sushil Kumar Singh, Block Pramukh, with regard to the property owned by Jagannath Verma, father of the applicant of FIR No. 0222 of 2025, opened fire and in the incident, Arun Kumar Mishra as also Aditya Kumar Mishra sustained firearm injuries. This FIR also indicates that the applicant was not present at the situs of the crime and therefore his name does not find place in the FIR and it is the co-accused Sushil Kumar Singh, Block Pramukh, who is the main accused. 6. It is lastly submitted the co-accused persons namely Sushil Kumar Singh, the main accused and Akhilesh Srivastava have been granted bail by this court vide order dated 14.10.2025 and 10.10.2025, in Criminal Misc. Bail Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sumit Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Jay Prakash @ Chandra Maurya .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Application No. 9354 of 2025 and Criminal Misc Bail Application No. 9699 of 2025 respectively. He further submits that there is no possibility of the applicant fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial and would also not influence the prosecution witnesses. In these circumstances of the case, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of the applicant. However, he could not dispute the above contentions made by the applicant's counsel. 8. Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of the application, F.I.R., as well as other relevant documents including statement(s) on record as well as the role attributed to the applicant, as also the fact that the co- accused persons namely Sushil Kumar Singh and Akhilesh Srivastava have been granted bail; and without entering into the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the application has substance and it is accordingly, allowed. 9. The application is allowed on the ground of parity. 10. Let the applicant- Jay Prakash @ Chandra Maurya, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions :- (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 84 B.N.S.S. 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 209 of B.N.S. October 16, 2025 DiVYa BAIL No. 10109 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench