Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:4203 Court No. - 5 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37996 of 2024 Applicant :- Harsh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohit Kumar Singh,Sujata Choudhary Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Hemant Kumar Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J. By means of the bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 303 of 2023 at Police Station- Saroorpur, District- Meerut under Sections 302, 120-B, 34 IPC and Section 3/25/27 of Arms Act. The applicant is in jail since 31.12.2023. The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 20.07.2024. The following arguments made by Smt. Sujat Choudhary, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Sri Hemant Kumar, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Chandan Agarwal, learned AGA-I from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail: 1. Briefly put the prosecution case set out it the FIR is that one Saurabh and the wife of the deceased were in illicit relationship and the two conspired to eliminate the deceased. 2. The applicant was not named in the FIR. 3. The applicant was nominated in the statement made by the co-accused person before the police authorities while in the custody of the latter. The said statement insofar as it implicates the applicant is not admissible in evidence. 4. The applicant had no motive to commit the murder. 5. There is no direct evidence against the applicant. 6. One country made pistol was planted on the applicant to frame him in the instant case to burnish the credentials of the police investigators without diligent investigations. There is no independent witness to the recovery. 7. No FSL report has been submitted to link the weapon with the crime. 8. The applicant has explained his criminal history. It is also contended that the applicant has become a soft target and a convenient scapegoat for the police authorities who nominated him in a false case to burnish their professional credentials. The said case does not have any bearing on the instant bail application. 9. The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to cooperate with the court proceedings. There is no possibility of the applicant influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending. In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant- Harsh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial. (ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. (iii) The learned trial court is directed to fix the sureties after due application of mind in light of the judgement passed by this Court in Arvind Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. (Application U/S 482 No.2613 of 2023). The learned trial court shall ensure that the right of bail of the applicant granted by this Court is not frustrated by arbitrary demands of sureties, or onerous conditions which are unrelated to the socioeconomic status of the applicant. Order Date :- 8.1.2025 Dhananjai Digitally signed by :- DHANANJAI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad