Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:43228 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47453 of 2024 Applicant :- Faizan Haidar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Shri Rajeev Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Pradeep Kumar, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.102 of 2024, under Sections 302, 392, 411 IPC, Police Station Mubarakpur, District Azamgarh, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that FIR of the present case was lodged against unknown person with regard to murder of the wife of the informant and during investigation after one month applicant has been made accused in the present matter through information furnished by police informer. 5. He further submits that however as per allegation when applicant was arrested then he confessed his guilt and from his possession jewelries of the deceased were recovered but entire recovery is false and baseless. 6. He further submits that even without any other corroborative evidence merely on the basis of above recovery, it cannot be said that applicant committed the murder of the alleged offence. 7. He further submits that apart from the present case, applicant was having previous criminal of thirteen other cases and only due to his previous criminal history, police during investigation implicated him in the present matter and his entire criminal history has been explained in the supplementary affidavit filed in support of the instant bail application. 8. He further submits that majority of the cases were old one and in majority of the cases, applicant has already served the sentence. 9. He further submits that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 21.04.2024 i.e. for last almost a year. 10. Per contra, learned AGA however, opposed the prayer for bail and submits that applicant is hardened criminal and he is having previous criminal of thirteen other cases but he could not dispute the other arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 11. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record of the case. 12. FIR of the present case was lodged against unknown person and it appears, after one month applicant has been made accused in the present matter through the information furnished by police informer and however as per prosecution, from the possession of the applicant some jewelries of the deceased were recovered but it appears, except the confessional statement of the applicant and above recovery, there is no other cogent evidence against the applicant on record and considering this fact, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant in this regard cannot be completely brushed aside at this stage. 13. Further, however, apart from the present case, applicant is having previous criminal of thirteen other cases but his entire criminal history has been explained in the supplementary affidavit filed in support of the instant bail application and it appears, majority of the cases were old one and considering his criminal antecedents, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that only due to his previous criminal history, police during investigation implicated him in the present matter, cannot be ruled out at this stage specially considering the manner of implication of the applicant in the present matter i.e. through information furnished by police informer. 14. Further, law is settled, if otherwise case of bail is made out then merely on the basis of criminal antecedents of an accused, his bail application ordinarily should not be withheld. 15. Further, applicant is in jail in the present matter since 21.04.2024 i.e. for last almost a year. 16. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 17. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 18. Let the applicant- Faizan Haidar, 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. 19. 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. 20. 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 :- 24.3.2025 Zafar Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad