Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:17578 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45270 of 2024 Applicant :- Rajnish Alias Chhota Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Atul Kumar Kushwaha,G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant in the Court is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Rajesh Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajeet Madhesiya, learned Brief Holder for the State-respondent and Sri Atul Kumar Kushwaha, learned counsel for the informant. 3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.178 of 2024, under Sections 302, 201, 147, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Titavi, District Muzaffar Nagar, during pendency of the trial. 4. FIR of the present case was lodged on 29.07.2024 against applicant and others on the application dated 30.06.2024 and according to the FIR on 15.06.2024 at about 12 p.m. son of the informant had gone alongwith applicant and one another accused and at 7 p.m. in the evening, he received an information that dead- body of his son is lying near the field of one Mukesh. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that it is a case of circumstantial evidence and on the basis of false allegation, applicant has been made accused in the present matter. 6. He further submits that except the allegation that applicant and other accused persons has taken the deceased on 15.06.2024 at about 12 p.m. and subsequently his dead-body was found at 7 p.m. in the evening, there is no evidence against the applicant on record. 7. He further submits that FIR of the present case was lodged after about one and half months on the application of the informant and even application was moved by him after fifteen days, therefore, no reliance can be placed on the F.I.R. 8. He further submits that informant failed to explain the inordinate delay in lodging the FIR of the present case. 9. He further submits that even merely on the basis of above evidence of last seen, at this stage, it cannot be said that applicant committed the murder of the deceased alongwith other accused. 10. He further submits that applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 07.10.2024. 11. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submit that there is definite evidence agianst the applicant that he alongwith other named accused persons has taken the deceased on 15.06.2024 at 12 p.m. from his house and at 7 p.m. in the evening his dead-body was found but they could not dispute the fact that FIR of the present case was lodged after about one and half months on the application of the informant dated 30.06.2024 and even application was moved by him after fifteen days. 12. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case. 13. However, as per the FIR, applicant and other named co- accused persons alongwith their unknown associates has taken the deceased on 15.06.2024 at 12 p.m. from his house and at 7 p.m. in the evening his dead-body was found but it reflects that FIR of the present case was lodged on 29.07.2024 i.e. after about one and half months. 14. Further, from the FIR, it reflects that however it was lodged through an application dated 30.06.2024 and even application was moved by the informant after fifteen days. 15. Further, except the evidence of last seen, there is no other evidence against the applicant on record. 16. Further, from the post-mortem report, cause of death of the deceased could not be ascertained and his viscera was preserved but now viscera report is on record and according to it, deceased died due to consumption of Amonium Phosphide and there is no evidence that applicant administered the poison to the deceased. 17. Further, applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 07.10.2024. 18. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 19. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 20. Let the applicant- Rajnish @ Chhota 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 her 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. 21. 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. 22. 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 :- 6.2.2025 Zafar Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad