Dilgajan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the co-accused Totaram and Kishori Lal who were assigned similar role have been enlarged on bail by this Court and by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 24.09.2025 and 06.11.2025 passed in criminal misc. bail application Nos. 9236 of 2025 and 7262 of 2025. Learned counsel for the applicant seeks parity with the order of the co-accused.

¶11

It is further submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 01.06.2025 without having any criminal antecedent. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Learned AGA has opposed the bail application, however, could not dispute the fact that it is a case of parity.

¶13

On due consideration to the fact that co-accused Totaram and Kishori Lal who were assigned similar role have been enlarged on bail, coupled with the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 01.06.2025, without having any criminal antecedent, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail on the ground of parity.

¶14

BAIL No. 7161 of 2025

¶15

2

¶16

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶17

Let the applicant Dilgajan involved in Case Crime No.223/2025, under Sections 317(2), 318(4), 319(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2) B.N.S, registered at Police Station- Sisiriya, District- Shrawasti, 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:-

¶18

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶19

(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.

¶20

(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.

¶21

(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.

¶22

(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).

¶23

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.

¶24

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶25

November 14, 2025

¶26

R.C.

¶27

Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dilgajan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dilgajan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Deepak Pal Vs State of Up Thru. Prin. Secy. Lko.

Kamal Kutil Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Liyakat Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Dinesh Singh @ Dinesh Kumar Singh @ Dinesh @ D.K Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Jamal Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. and Another

Shahjad @ Saiyaad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko.