Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 104580 (ALL)

ANIKET v. State of UP

BAIL/41661/2024 · 2025-01-07

Sameer Jain

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:2761 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41661 of 2024 Applicant :- Aniket Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar,Mahendra Pal Singh Gaur Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri M.P. Singh Gaur, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vijay Bahadur Maurya, learned AGA for the State- respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 164 of 2024, under Section 302 IPC, Police Station- Kataghar, District- Moradabad, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. FIR of the present case was lodged on 09.04.2024 and according to FIR, on 08.04.2024 applicant and co-accused Bittu has taken the brother of the informant from his home and at about 12:30 in the night his dead body was recovered. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that on the basis of false allegation, applicant has been made accused in the present matter and it is a case of circumstantial evidence and only evidence against the applicant is the evidence of last seen. 5. He further submitted that as per post-mortem report of the deceased, which has been conducted on 09.04.2024 at about 1:10 p.m., he died about half day before and thus deceased died on or around 09.04.2024 after mid night and from perusal of the statement of the informant, it reflects that deceased had gone along with applicant and co-accused in the evening, therefore, there is huge gap between the evidence of last seen and death of the deceased and, therefore, merely on the basis of alleged evidence of last seen, it cannot be said that, applicant committed the murder of the deceased. 6. He further submitted that however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of one another case of matrimonial dispute but his criminal history has been explained in the instant bail application and applicant is in jail in the present matter since 10.04.2024 i.e. for last almost nine months. 7. Per contra, learned AGA however, opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 9. Considering the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant and the fact that it is a case of circumstantial evidence and except the evidence of last seen, there is no cogent evidence against the applicant on record and criminal history of one case of applicant has been explained in the instant bail application and he is in jail in the present matter for last almost nine months., in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 10. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant- Aniket 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. 12. 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. 13. 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 :- 7.1.2025/KK Patel Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad