Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:6076 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40969 of 2024 Applicant :- Sumit Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Sudhir Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA, for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.123 of 2024, under Sections 304 and 328 IPC, Police Station Sungarhi, District Pilibhit during pendency of the trial. 3. FIR of the present case was lodged on 19.4.2024 against the applicant under Sections 304 and 328 IPC and according to the FIR applicant developed illicit relationship with the daughter of the informant and when informant came to know about this fact then in this regard in the month of February, 2024 a Panchayat was held and applicant was instructed not to make contact with his daughter but in spite of that he used to meet her. It is further mentioned in the FIR that on 12.4.2024 informant was on his field and at about 3.30 PM in the afternoon when informant came to his home then he witnessed that applicant was running from his home and when he entered in the home then found that his daughter was lying on the cot and she informed that applicant forcibly administered some poisonous substances to her and thereafter she was taken to the Hospital and on 18.4.2024 she died. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on the basis of false allegation merely on the basis of suspicion applicant has been made accused in the present matter. 5. He further submits that actually applicant and deceased both were having love affair but informant was totally against their relationship and after the panchayat applicant had left the village and thereafter he never met with the deceased and it appears that due to restriction imposed by informant and others deceased consumed some poisonous substances and died and after her death on the basis of false allegation applicant has been made accused in the present matter. 6. He further submits that however, as per informant on the date of incident at about 3.30 PM he witnessed the applicant while applicant was running from his home but this fact is false as applicant never visited the house of informant on 12.4.2023. 7. He further submits that except the informant, no other witness could come forward to give above evidence against the applicant. 8. He further submits that even FIR of the present case was lodged on 19.4.2024, i.e., after seven days from the date of alleged administration of poisonous substances by applicant to the deceased and this fact again shows that FIR is nothing but bundle of false facts. 9. He further submits that during post mortem cause of death of the deceased could not be ascertained and her viscera was preserved but till date viscera report is not on record and, therefore, till date it cannot be said that deceased died due to consumption of any poisonous substances. 10. He further submits that there is absolutely no evidence on record which can show that applicant was the person, who administered some poisonous substances to the deceased. 11. He further submits that applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 28.7.2024, i.e., for almost six months. 12. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that on 12.4.2024 at about 3.30 PM in the afternoon informant witnessed the applicant while he was running from his house but could not dispute the fact that FIR of the present case was lodged on 19.7.2024, i.e., after seven days after the death of the deceased. He further could not dispute that except the statement of the informant, there is no other evidence against the applicant on record that he was running from the house of informant. 13. Learned AGA further could not dispute the fact that there is no evidence which can suggest that applicant was the person, who administered any poisonous substances to the deceased. He further could not dispute the fact that till date viscera report could not be received. 14. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 15. It is a case of circumstantial evidence and only circumstance as narrated by the informant against the applicant is that informant witnessed him while he was running from his house on 12.4.2024 at about 3.30 PM in the afternoon but FIR of the present case was lodged after seven days. 16. Further, except the informant none of the witnesses could disclose the fact that they also witnessed the applicant while he was in the house of the informant or was running from his house and considering this fact the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant in this regard cannot be completely ruled out at this stage especially considering the statement of the witnesses recorded during investigation including the statement of the mother of the deceased that after Panchayat applicant left the village. 17. Further, admittedly there is no evidence on record which can suggest that applicant is the person, who administered alleged poisonous substances to the deceased and in the absence of such evidence no presumption can be drawn against the applicant in this regard. 18. Further, viscera report of the deceased till date is not on record and, therefore, till date it cannot be said that she died due to consumption of poisonous substances. 19. Further, applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 28.7.2024, i.e., for almost six months. 20. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 21. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 22. Let the applicant-Sumit Kumar 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. 23. 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. 24. 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 SKM Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad