Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:21627 Court No. - 5 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4836 of 2025 Applicant :- Praveen Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mary Puncha (Sheeb Jose),Mohd. Kalim Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J. Matter is taken up in the revised call. By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 256 of 2023 at Police Station- Chandaus, District-Aligarh under Section 302 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 10.09.2023. The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 05.06.2024. The following arguments made by Ms. Sheeba Jose, learned counsel and Mohd. Kaleem, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Suchit Tandon, learned AGA from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail: 1. The first informant has nominated the applicant in the FIR solely on the basis of suspicion. Suspicion no matter how grave is no substitute for evidence. 2. There is no direct evidence or eye witness of the incident. 3. The chain of incriminating circumstances against the applicant is not complete. 4. The applicant has been nominated solely on account of a dispute over a family property. 5. The applicant never pressurized the deceased to sell any parcel of land. 6. Some witnesses were set up by the prosecution to save the failing prosecution case. However, the said witnesses have not stated that they saw the applicant in the company of the deceased at a time proximate to the death of the latter. 7. No incriminating article has been recovered from the applicant. 8. The applicant claims congruency in role and seeks parity in relief granted to the co-accused who has been enlarged on bail by this Court by order dated 07.02.2024 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2011 of 2024. 9. The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case. 10. The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to join the trial proceedings. There is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending. In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant-Praveen be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial. (ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. The learned trial court is directed to fix the sureties after due application of mind in light of the judgement rendered by this Court in Arvind Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. (Application U/S 482 No.2613 of 2023). The learned trial court shall ensure that the right of bail of the applicant granted by this Court is not frustrated by arbitrary demands of sureties or onerous conditions which are unrelated to the socioeconomic status of the applicant. Order Date :- 14.2.2025 Vandit Digitally signed by :- VANDIT AGRAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- VANDIT AGRAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad