HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8483 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.369 of 2022 under Section 302, 201, 34 Indian Penal Code, Police Station Baldirai, District Sultanpur. In the FIR it is alleged that on 6.12.2022 at about 5.30, the wife of the informant went to see her fields; however, she did not return. After search, her dead body was found in the orchard of Jagdev Pandey. She had suffered numerous injuries and was bleeding from the head. Someone had killed her and thrown the dead body. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the postmortem report, the cause of death is stated to be shock and hemorrhage due to antemortem injuries. Seven antemortem injuries were found on the deceased. He further submits that the applicant’s name is not mentioned in the FIR, nor was the statement of the informant taken. After two months, the statement of the child Subhash, who is deaf and dumb, was recorded with the help of a special educator. In the statement, the child stated that two persons had committed the murder of the deceased; however, he did not name the applicant. In that statement, the photo of the accused was shown to the child, and he identified it. Subsequently, the statement of the applicant was recorded by the Investigating Officer, wherein suspicion was raised upon Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ramakar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sandeep Kumar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko .....Opposite Party(s) him. On the basis of such suspicion, the Investigating Officer obtained an order for narco test of six suspected persons from the learned CJM, who passed the order on 22.8.2023. Out of the six, three persons underwent narco test; however, the applicant could not undergo the narco test. After 26 months of the incident, an axe is shown to have been recovered from the applicant, for which there is no independent witness. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that no test identification parade has been conducted. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. It is a case of circumstantial evidence. The chain of circumstances is not complete. The applicant is in jail since 23.2.2025. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the facts mentioned above. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record. On due consideration of the facts that the applicant has no criminal antecedents; he is in jail since 23.2.2025; charge-sheet has been filed; the alleged recovery of axe has been shown after 26 months of the incident; no test identification parade has been conducted; prima facie the chain of circumstances does not appear to be complete, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Sandeep Kumar be released on bail in aforesaid first information report number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below concerned with the following conditions: (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to BAIL No. 8483 of 2025 2 dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the IPC (now Section 269 BNS). (vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS)is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the IPC (now Section 209 BNS). September 8, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S BAIL No. 8483 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench