Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:61437 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4592 of 2025 Applicant :- Gaurav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Haya Rizvi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Ms. Haya Rizvi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Jhamman Ram, learned AGA-I for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 588 of 2024, under Sections 140(3), 103(1), 238 B.N.S., Police Station Baghpat, District Baghpat during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, FIR of the present case was lodged against unknown persons with regard to missing of the son of the informant but on 08.07.2024 at 17.24 hours he gave an application to the police that he is having suspicion upon the applicant that he involved in the present case and on the basis of information given by the informant as per prosecution when applicant was arrested then on his pointing out dead body of the deceased was recovered but entire allegation leveled against the applicant is totally false and applicant neither confessed his guilt nor any recovery was made either from his possession or on his pointing out. 4. She further submits, from the recovery memo, it reflects, the alleged recovery of dead body was made from a sugarcane field which was accessible to all. She next submits, it appears, after recovery of dead body on the basis false allegation applicant has been roped in the present matter. 5. She next submits, however, apart from the recovery of the dead body of the deceased on the pointing out of the applicant, as per prosecution, when statements of two witnesses namely Rajendra Singh and Monu were recorded then they stated that on 04.07.2024 they witnessed the applicant along with the deceased but their statements were recorded after 51 days and even their statements do not appear to be convincing. 6. She next submits, it is a case of circumstantial evidence and there is no cogent evidence against the applicant which can connect him with the instant crime. 7. She next submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is jail since 08.07.2024 i.e. for last more than nine months. 8. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 10. It is a case of circumstantial evidence and it reflects, after three days from the date of FIR when informant raised suspicion against the applicant then applicant has been made accused in the present matter and however as per prosecution when applicant was arrested then he confessed his guilt and on his pointing out the dead body of the deceased was recovered but from the recovery memo it reflects, dead body of the deceased was recovered from a sugarcane field, which was accessible to all and considering the entire facts of the case, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that actually when dead body of the deceased was recovered then subsequently applicant has been made accused in the present matter, cannot be ruled out at this stage. 11. Further, however, record also suggests that witnesses Rajendra and Monu in their statements recorded during investigation stated that they witnessed the applicant along with deceased on 04.07.2024 but their statements do not appear to be convincing and their statements were recorded after 51 days. 12. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is jail since 08.07.2024 i.e. for last more than nine months. 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 - Gaurav 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 :- 23.4.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad