Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:52195 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9076 of 2025 Applicant :- Krishna Raikwar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Kishor Gupta,Shiv Shankar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State-respondent is taken on record. 2. Heard Shri Shiv Shankar Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr. S. B. Maurya, learned AGA-I for the State- respondent. 3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.241 of 2024, under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Mauranipur, District Jhansi, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 4. FIR of the present case was lodged on 02.05.2024 and according to the FIR in the night of 01/02.05.2024 at about 12:30 a.m. applicant committed the murder of the son of the informant through sharp edged weapon and informant witnessed him while he was running from the spot. It is further mentioned in the FIR that immediately after the incident, information was given by the informant side at dial 112. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that however, applicant is named in the FIR and as per allegation, he committed the murder of the deceased but entire allegation levelled against him is totally false. 6. He further submits that from the FIR, it reflects that informant could not see the real incident however, according to him, he witnessed the applicant while he was running from the spot but this fact is totally false. 7. He further submits that however during investigation when the statements of some witnesses were recorded then they stated that applicant caused injury to the deceased but statements of these witnesses were recorded on 03.05.2024 and immediately after the incident, information was given by the informant side at dial 112 and details of which has been annexed at page 34 of the paper book, which suggests that one Balmukund gave this information and according to him, it is not known, who committed the murder of his brother and this fact clearly suggests that entire allegation of murder levelled against applicant is false and during investigation all the witnesses started making false allegation against him. 8. 8. He further submits that actually earlier some dispute arose between applicant and deceased and only due to this reason applicant has been made accused in the present matter and fact of dispute has been admitted by the informant in the FIR itself. 9. He further submits that applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 06.05.2024 i.e. for last almost a year. 10. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that applicant is specifically named in the FIR and as per the eye-witnesses, they witnessed that applicant committed the murder of the deceased but he could not dispute the fact that statements of these witnesses were recorded on 03.05.2024 and immediately after the incident, information was given by the brother of the deceased at dial 112 and according to the information given by him, it was not known, who committed the murder of his brother. 11. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 06.05.2024 i.e. for last almost a year. 12. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record of the case. 13. However, as per allegation, applicant committed the murder of the deceased and when the statements of the witnesses were recorded then they also started claiming themselves eye-witnesses and stated that applicant committed the murder of the deceased but prima-facie, their statements appear to be doubtful after considering the information given by the brother of the deceased immediately after the incident at dial 112, which has been annexed at page 34 of the paper book. 14. Further, applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 06.05.2024 i.e. for last almost a year. 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- Krishna Raikwar, 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 :- 9.4.2025 Zafar Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad