Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:41565 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4613 of 2025 Applicant :- Gayatri Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Bharti Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Pankaj Bharti, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V.K.S Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the material placed on record. 3. Counter affidavit filed by the learned A.G.A. today is taken on record. Learned counsel for the applicant does not propose to file any rejoinder affidavit. 4. This is the second bail application. The first bail application was rejected by this Court vide order dated 28.11.2024. 5. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 149 of 2023, under Sections 302 I.P.C., Police Station Jhinjhana, District Shamli, during the pendency of trial. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. As a new ground, learned counsel has stated that all the witnesses of fact i.e. PW-1, PW-2, PW-3 and PW-4, who have been examined in court during trial, have completely resiled from their earlier statements and have been cross-examined by the public prosecutor after declaring them hostile. There is no likelihood of conviction of the applicant in the present case. Learned counsel has further stated that there is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 15.04.2023 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the settled law of the Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690 and Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant- Gayatri, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence. (ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 11. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 21.3.2025 Sumit S (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad