JUDGMENT Akhtar Husain Khan, J. Heard learned counsel for accused-applicant, Nawab @ Nabbu as well as learned A.G.A. on bail application moved by said accused-applicant under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in S.T. No.279 of 2012, Crime No.396 of 2011, under Sections 147, 302, 201 and 34-120B I.P.C., Police Station Lalganj, District Pratapgarh. 2. Learned counsel for accused-applicant contended that accused-applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. 3. Learned counsel for accused-applicant further contended that there is no evidence against accused-applicant except extra judicial confession allegedly made by accused-applicant. 4. Learned counsel for accused-applicant contended that the alleged extra judicial confession made by accused-applicant is false and concocted, and witness Ashok Kumar Singh, before whom accused-applicant is alleged to have made extra judicial confession, has not supported version of prosecution while he was examined before trial court as P.W.-2. 5. Learned counsel for accused-applicant contended that co-accused Suggan has already been granted bail vide order dated 18.2.2015 passed by coordinate bench of this court in Bail No.2907 of 2014, while co-accused Sagheer Ahmad and Nafees @ Sharif Ahmad have been granted bail vide order dated 1.5.2015 passed by coordinate bench of this court in Bail No.2002 of 2015. 6. Learned counsel for accused-applicant contended that accused-applicant is also entitled to bail on the ground of parity. 7. Learned A.G.A. opposed bail application of accused-applicant but conceded that aforesaid co-accused Suggan, Sagheer Ahmad and Nafees @ Sharif Ahmad have been granted bail. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 8. Perusal of records shows that Crime No.396 of 2011, under Sections 302 and 201 I.P.C. was registered at Police Station Lalganj, District Pratapgarh against unknown persons on the report of informant Shiv Bhusan in which informant Shiv Bhusan has informed that on 13.9.2011 a headless female's dead-body has been found in canal near Primary School, Sunderpur Second which indicates that murder has been committed. After registration of said crime, during investigation witness Ashok Kumar Singh stated before Investigating Officer in statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that on 12.9.2011 accused-applicant Nawab @ Nabbu came along with co-accused Sagheer Ahmad, Nafees @ Sharif Ahmad, Suggan @ Subban and Habib and made extra judicial confession before him to the effect that he has committed murder of his daughter who had eloped with Avinash Chandra Yadav. Thus, the name of accused-applicant as well as remaining co-accused came into light on the basis of said statement of witness Ashok Kumar Singh. 9. Witness Ashok Kumar Singh has been examined before trial court as P.W.-2, but admittedly he has not supported version of prosecution regarding extra judicial confession allegedly made by accused-applicant before him. 10. Co-accused Suggan has been granted bail vide order dated 18.2.2015 passed by Hon'ble Surendra Vikram Singh Rathore,J. in Bail No.2907 of 2014, while co-accused Sagheer Ahmad and Nafees @ Sharif Ahmad have been granted bail vide order dated 1.5.2015 passed by Hon'ble Sudhir Kumar Saxena,J. in Bail No.2002 of 2015. 11. Considering all facts and circumstances of the case as well as evidence and bail granted to said three co-accused, I am of the view that accused-applicant is also entitled to bail on the ground of parity. 12. In view of discussion made above, bail application of accused-applicant, Nawab @ Nabbu, is allowed. He shall be released on bail on furnishing two sureties with personal bond each of like amount to the satisfaction of trial court concerned subject to following conditions: (i) 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. (ii) 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 Penal Code. (iii) 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. 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 of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.