HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9155 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.304 of 2025 under Section 103(1), 238 BNS, Police Station Shahabad, District Hardoi. In the prosecution case it is alleged that on 12.05.2025, at about 9:00 p.m., Ratiram took the complainant’s husband, Rampal, with him and left him at a hut situated in the field of Suresh. At that time, Suresh and Nanhe were present in the said hut. Thereafter, the complainant’s husband Rampal told Ratiram to go home, stating that he would remain with Suresh and Nanhe. It is further alleged that Ratiram returned to his home after saying that he would go home after consuming ganja. However, when the complainant’s husband Rampal did not return home, the complainant and her family members made extensive searches for him but could not trace his whereabouts. Consequently, the complainant lodged a missing complaint at Police Station Shahabad on 13.05.2025. Despite continuous search efforts by the complainant, her family members, and the local police, Rampal could not be traced. On 14.05.2025, at about 7:30 a.m., the complainant received information from one Poonam that the dead body of her husband Rampal was lying in the sugarcane field of Mahendra. The complainant along with her family members immediately reached the spot and found the body of Rampal lying in the said field. Upon receiving the information, the police of Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajeet Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Chhunalal .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Sectt. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Shahabad and the field unit team also reached the spot. The complainant has alleged that her husband Rampal has been murdered by Suresh and Nanhe. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the alleged recovery of a khurpi (trowel), two pairs of black shoes, two black socks, and a lathis have been shown to which there is no independent witness. There is no other eye witness account nor even “last seen” evidence against the applicant. The case rests only on the suspicion raised by the wife of the deceased. It is further submitted that there is no likelihood of the applicant fleeing from justice or tampering with witnesses. In case he is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submitted that the cause of death has been opined as shock and hemorrhage due to antemortem injuries. I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. On due consideration of the facts that the applicant has no criminal antecedents; the charge-sheet has been filed; except the recovery of certain articles, to which there is no independent witness, prima facie there appears to be no other circumstantial evidence; the chain of circumstances also appears to be incomplete; the applicant has been in jail since 16.05.2025 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 Chhunalal 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. BAIL No. 9155 of 2025 2 (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 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 23, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S BAIL No. 9155 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench