Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:2875 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42767 of 2024 Applicant :- Dharmendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Munna Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Munna Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr. S.B. Maurya, learned AGA-I for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 573 of 2024, under Sections 304, 323 IPC, Police Station Bansgaon, District Gorakhpur during pendency of the trial. 3. FIR of the present case was lodged on 04.09.2024 against unknown persons and according to the FIR informant was sleeping along with her husband and in the night of 30/31.05.2024 some unknown persons committed the murder of her husband i.e. deceased and also caused injury to her. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, nobody was named in the FIR of the present case and FIR of the present case was lodged after more than three months. 5. He further submits, when the statement of the informant was recorded during investigation on 20.09.2024 i.e. after more than three and half months from the date of alleged incident then initially, however, informant did not disclose the name of anyone but on the repeated pressure built by the Investigating Officer she stated that applicant, who is her son was under intoxication and due to property dispute he caused injury to the deceased through sharp edge weapon, therefore, after more than three and half months, applicant has been made accused in the present matter by his mother. 6. He further submits, from the perusal of the statement of the mother, which has been annexed at page 47 of the paper-book, it reflects that it was given under the pressure of Investigating Officer and merely on the basis of such statement, it cannot be that applicant committed the murder of his father i.e. deceased. 7. He further submits, even informant of the case is the deponent of the case and this fact clearly suggests that actually she did not give such statement to the Investigating Officer during investigation as noted by the Investigating Officer in the case diary. 8. He further submits, however after the statement of the mother of the applicant i.e. informant of the case, other brothers of the applicant also started making allegation against the applicant but as informant i.e. mother of the applicant had implicated the applicant, therefore, they also reiterated her version and actually they were not the eye witnesses as if they would have witness the incident then they must have disclosed the name of applicant at the time of lodging the FIR. 9. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 01.10.2024. 10. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant is the son of the informant and her husband i.e. deceased and informant i.e. mother of applicant in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. stated that applicant caused injury to his father but could not dispute the fact that FIR of the present case was lodged after three months and statement of the informant was recorded after more than three and half months. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 12. FIR of the present case was lodged after three months against unknown person and it appears, applicant has been made accused during investigation through the statement of his mother who is also informant of the case and this fact cast doubt on the prosecution case. 13. Further, statement of mother of the applicant i.e. informant was recorded after more than three and half months. 14. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 01.10.2024. 15. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 16. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 17. Let the applicant - Dharmendra 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. 18. 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. 19. 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 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad