Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:6139 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45276 of 2024 Applicant :- Dilip Singh Alias Prem Singh Rajput Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akash Mishra,Krishan Mohan Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Akash Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajiv Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 20 of 2024, under Sections 302, 201 IPC, Police Station Sahson, District Etawah, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. FIR of the present case was lodged on 10.6.2024 against unknown person and according to the FIR, elder brother of the informant had gone from his home on 6.6.2024 at 10:00 am in the morning and thereafter he could not be found. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that nobody was named in the FIR but during investigation applicant has been made accused in the present matter on the basis of the fact that he was last seen alongwith the deceased and dead body of the deceased was found from his field. 5. He further submitted that as per prosecution when applicant was arrested then he confessed his guilt and on his pointing out, one spade and an axe was recovered which alleged to have been used in the crime but entire recovery is false and baseless. 6. He further submitted that except the above evidence, there is no other evidence against the applicant on record. 7. He further submitted that field of the applicant is an open field which was accessible to all and therefore, if dead body of the deceased was found in his field then on the basis of this fact, it cannot be said that applicant is the person who committed the murder of the deceased. 7. He further submitted that evidence of last seen is a weak piece of evidence and there was no occasion for the applicant, after taking the deceased in his field to commit his murder. 8. He further submitted that it is highly improbable that applicant would commit murder of the deceased in his field. 9. He further submitted that during investigation Investigating Officer could not complete the chain of circumstances on the basis of which it could be said that applicant was the person who committed the murder of the deceased. 10. He further submitted that applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 11.6.2024 i.e. for last more than seven months. 11. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant except the fact that apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of one other case but he fairly conceded that case relates to minor offence. 12. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 13. It appears to be a case of circumstantial evidence and during investigation, Investigating Officer collected the following evidences/circumstances:- (a) Applicant was last seen alongwith the deceased on 6.6.2024; (b) Dead body of the deceased was found in his field; and (c) On the pointing out of the applicant one spade and an axe were recovered which alleged to have been used in the crime. 14. However, as per prosecution dead body of the deceased was recovered from the field of the applicant but this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that merely on the basis of such evidence, it cannot be said that applicant is the person who committed the murder of the deceased as his field was an open field which was accessible to all. 15. Further, merely on the basis of evidence of last seen and recovery of the alleged weapons on the pointing out of the applicant, at this stage, it is difficult to believe that applicant is the person who committed the murder. 16. Further, however, apart from the present case, applicant is also having criminal history of one another case but that case relates to minor offences. 17. Further, applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 11.6.2024 i.e. for last more than seven months. 18. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 19. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 20. Let the applicant-Dilip Singh Alias Prem Singh Rajput, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 21. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 22. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 15.1.2025 Ankita Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad