HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30863 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Sudhakar Shukla, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Arun Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.103 of 2025, under Sections 103(1), 238(A) B.N.S., Police Station Tajganj, District Agra with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 4. As per prosecution story, the FIR was instituted against the husband of the deceased person regarding missing daughter of the informant since 4.2.2025. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the FIR is delayed by about four days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence. He is not named in the FIR and his name has come up subsequently during investigation and in his own confessional statement he is stated to have shown the place where the dead body was found dumped. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the dead body has been foisted on the applicant to have been recovered from a dried up well. The allegations are per se false. There is no test identification parade conducted of the applicant. A false recovery of mobile of the deceased Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sudhakar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Bheemsen Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) person was made from one Lala Ram and the photograph of applicant was shown to him from the True-caller and the said person had identified the applicant who had sold the said mobile phone to him. 7. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the said allegations are vague and are not as per Section 7 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, as such, the applicant is entitled for bail. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 10.4.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that it is an open and shut case. The mobile phone of the deceased person was recovered from one Lala Ram who had purchased it for Rs.300/- and identified the applicant to be the person who had sold the said mobile to him and the dead body has been recovered from a concealed place i.e. well and the same was extracted by using crane and there is no occasion for falsely implicating the applicant. 9. Learned AGA further submitted that the deceased was a married woman and she was having illicit relationship with the applicant and she pressurised the applicant to take her alongwith him, but the applicant refused and committed the said offence. 10. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that dead body of the deceased person has been recovered at the pointing out of the applicant from a dried up well, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. 11. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 12. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously in view of the principle as has been laid down in the recent judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab; 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India; (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment. BAIL No. 30863 of 2025 2 13. 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. October 15, 2025 Vikas Verma BAIL No. 30863 of 2025 3 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad