Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:70547 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4946 of 2025 Applicant :- Ghanshyam Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pt. S.P. Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- Dhirendra Kumar Verma,G.A.,Srawan Kumar Swarnkar Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. None appeared on behalf of the informant even in revised call. 2. Heard Shri Pt. S. P. Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Shatrughan Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State- respondent. 3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.274 of 2024, under Sections 302, 201 I.P.C., Police Station Mauranipur, District Jhansi, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that nobody was named in the FIR but during investigation after six and half months when the second statement of the witness Omprakash Kushwaha was recorded then he stated that applicant involved in the present crime alongwith his wife but even from his statement, which has been annexed at page 81 of the paper book, it reflects that he was not the eye-witness and on the basis of suspicion, he disclosed this fact. 5. He further submits that admittedly there is no eye-witness account and however, during investigation, as per prosecution when applicant was arrested then he confessed his guilt and on his pointing out, Voter I.D. and Aadhar Card of the deceased were recovered but entire recovery is false and planted one. It is next submitted, even merely on the basis of such recovery, at this stage, without any other corroborative evidence, it cannot be said that applicant involved in commission of the present crime specially considering the fact that above recovery was made after seven months. 6. He further submits that except above evidence, there is no other evidence against the applicant on record. 7. He further submits that applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 24.11.2024. 8. Per contra, learned AGA however, opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 9. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record of the case. 10. It is a case of circumstantial evidence and it reflects, after six months when the second statement of witness Omprakash Kushwaha was recorded then he disclosed the name of the applicant and it also reflects, merely on the basis of suspicion, he disclosed the name of the applicant. 11. Further, however, as per prosecution when applicant was arrested then on his pointing out Voter I.D. and Aadhar Card of the deceased were recovered but this recovery was made after seven months. 12. Further, this Court also finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that in absence of any other corroborative evidence merely on the basis of above recovery, at this stage, it cannot be said that applicant committed the murder of the deceased. 13. Further, applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 24.11.2024. 14. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 15. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 16. Let the applicant- Ghanshyam, 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. 17. 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. 18. 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 :- 2.5.2025 Zafar Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad