HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19394 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record. Learned counsel for the applicant does not propose to file rejoinder affidavit. 2. Heard Sri Pawan Singh Pundir, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri K.K. Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.195 of 2024, under Sections 302 I.P.C., Police Station-Gangoh, District-Saharanpur, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the cousin of the informant Manvi Tomar left her house for her BPES course by an e-rickshaw thereby the father of the informant followed her stating that victim had forgot her I-card at the house, as such, they rushed there to give the I-card to victim and followed her E- rickshaw and found that applicant was assaulting her with a knife and ran away leaving her dead on 22.05.2024 between 09:45-10:00 AM. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is too prompt as it was instituted at 11:00 AM itself. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence. The witnesses cannot be believed as they have not supported the prosecution story. There were only two eye witnesses to the incident i.e. son and the father duo and both have not supported the prosecution story. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Akash Pundir, Pawan Singh Pundir Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Rajesh Kumar, Udayveer Singh, Veena Dubey Sagar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 6. Learned counsel for the applicant further argued that P.W.1 has not supported the prosecution story during his cross-examination and P.W.2 has completely resiled from his earlier statements and has been cross- examined by the public prosecutor after declaring him hostile. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 23.05.2024 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. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that it is open and shut case as applicant was seen going towards the place of occurrence on the road and the applicant is seen running away from the place of occurrence in the CCTV footage of the locality. 8. It is further argued that P.W.1 has categorically supported the prosecution story during his examination-in-chief which was conducted on 03.01.2025 but his cross-examination was deferred and in the meantime he resiled from his earlier statement and did not support the prosecution story during his cross-examination undertaken on 25.03.2025. P.W. 2 and P.W.1 both are the relatives of the accused person. It is further submitted that the deceased has been put to death as she repulsed the one sided love of the applicant, under these circumstances, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 9. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the P.W.1 had supported the prosecution story during his examination-in-chief but resiled during his cross-examination as also the fact that applicant and P.W.1 and P.W.2 both are relatives to each other coupled with the fact that applicant was visible in the CCTV footage, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. 10. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 11. 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 BAIL No. 19394 of 2025 2 vs. Union of India; (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment. 12. 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 17, 2025 Karan BAIL No. 19394 of 2025 3 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- KARAN KUMAR RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad