Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:119366 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11942 of 2025 Applicant :- Shakeel Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kuamr Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Siddharth Mishra, Advocate holding brief of Sri Rakesh Kuamr Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 129 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 304-B of I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station - Hayat Nagar, District - Sambhal, during the pendency of trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the viscera report of the deceased person did not indicate any poison in it, as such, she has expired under normal circumstances. The ingredients of Section 304-B of IPC are not fulfilled. The instant case is a clear cut case of false implication. There are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons. 5. Learned counsel has placed much reliance upon the bail order of co-accused person, Shamshadi, who has already been enlarged on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.02.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 29145 of 2024. It is submitted that since the case of the applicant is at par to the co- accused, who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is languishing in jail since 15.05.2024, having no criminal history. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial. 6. The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspects of parity to the co- accused and of no criminal history of the applicant, have not been disputed by him. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, evidence on record, pending trial and in the light of the judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 and the judgement passed by the Supreme Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 coupled with the judgement of Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity. 8. Let the applicant- Shakeel, who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 10. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date:- 22.7.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad