Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:50007 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3360 of 2025 Applicant :- Omendra Ahirwar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ramanuj Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Ramanuj Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Santosh Nigam, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 311 of 2024, under Sections 140(1), 103(1), 238 BNS, Police Station- Kulpahar, District- Mahoba, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that FIR of the present case was lodged after three months from the date of missing of the deceased and however, applicant is named in the FIR along with two others but it appears, on the basis of suspicion, he has been made accused in the present matter. 4. He further submitted that however, as per prosecution, when applicant and others were arrested then they confessed their guilt and on their pointing out, alleged skeleton of the deceased was recovered but from perusal of the recovery memo, it reflects, entire recovery is totally false and planted one. He further submitted that even from the recovery memo, it reflects that recovery was made from a place, which was accessible to all and, therefore, merely on the basis of above recovery, at this stage, it cannot be said that applicant committed the murder of the deceased. 5. He further submitted that except the confessional statement of the applicant and recovery of alleged skeleton of the deceased on the pointing out of applicant and others, there is no other evidence against the applicant on record. 6. He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 19.10.2024 i.e. for last more than five months. 7. Per contra, learned AGA however, opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 9. It is a case of circumstantial evidence and it appears, as per prosecution, there are two circumstances against the applicant:- (a) his confessional statement, (b) on the pointing out of applicant and two others alleged skeleton of the deceased was recovered, From the recovery memo, it reflects that the alleged recovery was made from a place, which was accessible to all. 10. Further, after considering recovery memo, which has been annexed along with the instant bail application, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that prima facie, recovery of alleged skeleton of the deceased appears to be doubtful, cannot be completely ruled out at this stage. 11. Further, this Court also finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that merely on the basis of above recovery, at this stage, it cannot be said that applicant involved in commission of alleged crime. 12. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 19.10.2024. 13. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 14. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 15. Let the applicant- Omendra Ahirwar 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. 16. 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. 17. 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 :- 7.4.2025 KK Patel Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad