Harishchandra @ Hari Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2025)

Harishchandra @ Hari Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Release of applicant Harishchandra alias Hari on bail in Case Crime No. 59 of 2025 upon furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court, subject to conditions: (i) no tampering with evidence during trial; (ii) no pressurising/intimidating prosecution witnesses; (iii) no direct or indirect inducement, threat or promise to dissuade disclosure to the Court or police or tamper with evidence; (iv) undertaking not to seek adjournments on dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present, default to be treated as abuse of liberty of bail; (v) presence before the trial court on each date fixed, personally or through counsel, failing which action under Section 229-A IPC (now Section 269 BNS); (vi) on misuse of bail liberty, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS) and, on failure to appear, proceedings under Section 174-A IPC (now Section 209 BNS).

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused-applicant Harishchandra @ Hari should be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 59 of 2025 (P.S. Gurubuxganj, District Raebareli), registered under Sections 103(1), 238, 3(5), 61(2) of BNS. +1 more

Court's answer

On due consideration of the submissions, the record, the applicant's incarceration since 26.03.2025, the bail granted to co-accused, the role assigned and the circumstantial nature of the case, the prima facie chain of circumstance did not appear complete; without expressing any opinion on merits, the Court found it a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

Ratio / Principle

The bail application was allowed on the parity ground.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

BAIL GRANTED ON PARITY — Harishchandra @ Hari, accused-applicant in Case Crime No. 59 of 2025 (P.S. Gurubuxganj, District Raebareli) under Sections 103(1), 238, 3(5), 61(2) of BNS, was enlarged on bail by Karunesh Singh Pawar, J., High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench (Court No. 12), on 27 August 2025. The applicant was not named in the F.I.R. and was booked solely on the 'last seen' evidence of Suresh Yadav; there was no recovery and no eyewitness, the case resting wholly on circumstantial evidence in which the prima facie chain of circumstance did not appear complete. Parity was the decisive ground: co-accused Sachin had been granted bail on 18.07.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 6464 of 2025 and co-accused Brijesh Kumar Yadav had been enlarged on bail in Bail No. 7648 of 2025; the learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer but conceded it was a case of parity. The applicant, in custody since 26.03.2025 with no criminal history, was directed to furnish a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount, subject to standard conditions (no tampering with evidence, no intimidation of prosecution witnesses, no inducement/threat/promise, undertaking against adjournments when witnesses are present, presence at trial dates personally or through counsel), with absence/misuse triggers cross-referenced to Section 229-A IPC (now Section 269 BNS), Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS) and Section 174-A IPC (now Section 209 BNS).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6670 of 2025

Harishchandra @ Hari

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.	Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Sachin Verma, Praveen Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 12

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.59 of 2025, under Sections 103(1), 238, 3(5), 61(2) of BNS, P.S. Gurubuxganj, District Raebareli.

Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is not named in the F.I.R. however, only on the basis of last seen evidence of Suresh Yadav, the applicant without being any recovery has been booked in this case. The case is of circumstantial evidence. There is no eye witness to the incident.

He submits that co-accused Sachin has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 18.07.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.6464 of 2025 to which applicant seeks parity.

Another co-accused Brijesh Kumar Yadav has also been enlarged on bail vide order passed in Bail No.7648 of 2025.

Applicant has no criminal history. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 26.03.2025.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer but could not dispute the fact that it is a case of parity.

BAIL No. 6670 of 2025

2

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 26.03.2025, bail order of co-accused, named above, have been granted bail, role assigned to the applicant, case is of circumstantial evidence, prima facie chain of circumstance does not appear to be complete and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed on parity ground.

Let the applicant Harishchandra alias Hari, be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the 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 under Section 229-A of the Indian Panel Code (now Section 269 of BNS).

(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

BAIL No. 6670 of 2025

3

proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Panel Code (now Section 209 BNS).

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

August 27, 2025

kkb/

Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench