HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9737 of 2024 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State as well as Sri Piyush Kumar Singh who appears for the informant and perused the record. 2. The accused-applicant seeks bail in FIR/Case Crime No.135 of 2024 under section 302 IPC, P.S. Tulsipur, District Balrampur. 3. In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that the daughter of the informant had a fight with her husband, the applicant herein, because of which she was staying with the family of the informant. As the daughter of the informant was going for treatment with her younger sister, the applicant along with his accomplish took her and subsequently, her body was found near Kabristan and an apprehension was expressed that the applicant had committed the offence in question. The cause of death as per the postmortem report is Haemorrhagic shock due to ante mortem injuries. Subsequently, the last seen theory was supported by the sister of the deceased in her statement. 4. In the light of the said allegations, the counsel for the applicant states that apart from the last seen theory, no recovery was effected from the applicant or weapon allegedly used for the commission of the offence. It is further argued that the applicant is in custody since 28.05.2024 and Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dinesh Kr. Chaudhary, Akhilesh Kumar Tripathi, Naveen Kumar Pandey, Prashant Tiwari, Ripu Daman Shahi, Suresh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Piyush Kumar Singh Gabbar @ Dayaram .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Sectt. Lko .....Opposite Party(s) only the charge has been framed and not even a single witness has been examined. It is also argued that the applicant has no criminal history. 5. The counsel for the informant opposes the bail application by arguing that apart from the statement of last seen theory of the sister of the deceased, the CDR on record also corroborate the presence of the applicant on the spot and thus, considering the gravity of the offence, the bail application should be rejected. 6. Considering the submissions made at the bar, the applicant is being linked with the offence based upon the last seen theory and the CDR analysis, however, there are no independent witness to the incident and no recovery of weapon has been shown at the instance and pointing out of the applicant coupled with the fact that there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near future, as such, the applicant who is in custody since 28.05.2024 having no criminal history is entitled for the bail. Thus the bail application is allowed. 7. Let the applicant Gabbar @ Dayaram be released on bail in aforesaid FIR/Case Crime Number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions: (a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings; (b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and (c) 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. November 6, 2025 VNP/- BAIL No. 9737 of 2024 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- VISHVANATH PRASAD SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench