Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:72344 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6833 of 2025 Applicant :- Awadhesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Pankaj Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Jhamman Ram, learned AGA-I for the State. 3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 59 of 2024, under Sections 364/34, 302/34, 201/34, 120B IPC, Police Station Farah, District Mathura during pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however, applicant has been named in the FIR along with others but on the basis of false allegation he has been made accused in the present matter. He further submits, it is a case of circumstantial evidence and there is no cogent evidence against the applicant on record. 5. He further submits, along with applicant co-accused Rajesh was also named in the FIR but after considering the entire facts of the case in detail, he has been released on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court and his bail order has been annexed at page-67 of the paper-book and on facts, case of applicant is at par with him. 6. He further submits, however, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of six other cases but his criminal history has been explained in the instant bail application and out of six cases, two cases relate to present matter. He further submits, out of remaining four cases, one case is of Section 364A IPC in which applicant has been convicted but during pendency of his appeal, he has been released on bail by this Court in that case. 7. He further submits, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 03.03.2024 i.e. for last more than a year. 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. However, as per allegation applicant along with others committed the murder of the deceased but it reflects, it is a case of circumstantial evidence and after considering the entire facts of the case in detail co-accused Rajesh has been released on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court and on facts case of applicant is at par with him. 11. Further, however, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of six other cases but out of six cases in two cases applicant has been made accused along with present matter. 12. Further, out of remaining four cases, one case is of Section 364A IPC in which, applicant has been convicted by the trial court but during pendency of his appeal, he has been released on bail by the Division Bench of this Court. 13. Further, law is settled that if otherwise case of bail is made out then ordinarily merely on the basis of criminal history bail application of an accused should not be withheld. 14. Further, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 03.03.2024 i.e. for last more than a year. 15. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 16. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 17. Let the applicant - Awadhesh 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. 18. 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. 19. 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 :- 6.5.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad