Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:26814 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43467 of 2024 Applicant :- Sumit Ahirwar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- G.S. Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manish Dev Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Shri G. S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Ghanshyam Mishra, learned Brief Holder for the State- respondent and Shri Manish Dev, learned counsel for the informant. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.287 of 2024, under Sections 302, 201 I.P.C., Police Station Nawabad, District Jhansi, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. FIR of the present case was lodged on 22.6.2024 against three named (non-applicant) and 4-5 unknown persons and according to the FIR, son of the informant was having relationship with the sister of the named accused Kallu due to this reason, he alongwith other named accused and his unknown associates committed his murder. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is not named in the FIR but during investigation, when statement of one Sahil was recorded then he disclosed the name of the applicant but even from his statement, it could not be reflected that he witnessed the real incident in which deceased died and from his statement, it only reflects, earlier quarrel took place between applicant and others inducing deceased. He further submits, however, from his statement, it reflects, applicant also confessed his guilt before Sahil but neither applicant involved in the present crime nor he ever confessed his guilt before any one. 5. He further submits that during investigation, statement of one Kishori Lal was recorded after six days and he claimed himself to an eye-witness and stated that applicant alongwith co-accused Prince made assault upon the deceased through kicks and fists. He further submits, no weapon has been assigned by him to anyone and even from his statement, it reflects deceased was under intoxication. 6. He further submits that however, story narrated by alleged eye- witness Kishori Lal appears to be unconvincing but even from his statement, it could not be reflected that applicant and other accused were having any intention to commit the murder of the deceased as they were not having any weapon. 7. He further submits that actually deceased was under intoxication and earlier dispute arose between applicant and him, therefore, it appears, he under intoxication fell down and sustained injuries and died and after his death, due to previous incident, applicant has also been made accused in the present matter during investigation alongwith others. 8. He further submits that however, apart from the present case applicant was also made accused in one another criminal case but in that case, after investigation, final report has been submitted and he is in jail in the present matter since 24.06.2024 i.e. for last almost eight months. 9. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant however, opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. However, as per allegation, applicant alongwith co-accused Prince made assault upon the deceased due to which he sustained injuries and died and incident has been witnessed by one Kishori Lal but his statement was recorded after six days. 12. Further, even from the statement of sole eye-witness Kishori Lal, it reflects, applicant and other accused were not having any weapon and they used kicks and fists and considering this fact, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that even from the statement of the eye-witness Kishori Lal, it could not be reflected that applicant was having any intention to commit the murder of the deceased, cannot be ruled out at this stage. 13. Further, from the record, it also reflects that deceased was under intoxication and considering this fact the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that under intoxication, he fell down and sustained injuries and died, cannot be also ruled out at this stage. 14. Further, however, apart from the present case applicant was also made accused in one another criminal case but in that case, after investigation, final report has been submitted and he is in jail in the present matter since 24.06.2024 i.e. for last almost eight months. 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- Sumit Ahirwar 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 :- 24.2.2025 Zafar Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad