Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:20743 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2791 of 2025 Applicant :- Ranjeet Kumar Pal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Rajeev 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.405 of 2022, under Section 306 IPC, Police Station Campierganj, District Gorakhpur during pendency of the trial. 3. FIR of the present case was lodged on 9.9.2022 against the applicant and others under Sections 302, 328, 120-B and 201 IPC through an application moved under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. dated 27.7.2022 and according to the FIR, applicant by playing fraud got executed a sale deed of the property from the daughter of the sister-in-law of the informant in his favour and thereafter on 10.1.2022 he along with others by administering poison committed her murder. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per prosecution deceased died on 10.1.2022 but FIR of the present case was lodged on 9.9.2022, i.e., after about eight months through the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and even application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved on 27.7.2022, i.e., after more than six months and this inordinate delay in lodging the FIR itself suggests that on the basis of false allegation applicant has been made accused in the present matter. 5. He further submits that initially FIR of the present case was lodged under Sections 302, 328, 120-B and 201 IPC but during investigation when it was found that deceased actually committed suicide then case was converted under Section 306 IPC. 6. He further submits that applicant is the bona fide purchaser of the property of the deceased, therefore, it cannot be said that due to abetment of the applicant deceased committed suicide. 7. He further submits that there is absolutely no evidence against the applicant on record. He next submits that however, FIR of the present case was lodged on 9.9.2022 and applicant is in jail in the present matter since 4.1.2025 but he is not absconder and as FIR has been lodged through an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., therefore, applicant could not become aware about it and specific avernment in this regard has been made by applicant in paragraph-40 of the the affidavit filed in support of the instant bail application. 8. He further submits that applicant is not having any previous criminal history. 9. Per contra, learned AGA although opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. From the record it reflects that initially FIR of the present case was lodged under Sections 302, 328, 120-B and 201 IPC but during investigation when it was found that deceased actually committed suicide then case was converted under Section 306 IPC. 12. Further, FIR of the present case was lodged after eight months through an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and even application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved after six months, therefore, there is inordinate delay in lodging the FIR of the present case. 13. Further, considering the nature of allegation levelled against the applicant, the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant that there is absolutely no evidence of abetment against the applicant on record, cannot be ruled out at this stage. 14. Further, however, it appears that FIR of the present case was lodged in September, 2022 and applicant was arrested on 4.1.2025 but considering the avement made in paragraph-40 of the affidavit filed in support of the instant bail application it cannot be said said that he is an absconder. 15. Further, applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 04.1.2025. 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-Ranjeet Kumar Pal 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 :- 13.2.2025 SKM Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad