Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:34359 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8256 of 2025 Applicant :- Manoj Ram Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandan Kumar Chaturvedi,Ravindra Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Ravindra Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shatrughan Yadav, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 205 of 2024, under Sections 302, 201, 120B IPC, Police Station Pavai, District Azamgarh, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that however, applicant is named in the FIR but from perusal of the FIR it reflects that on the basis of the statement of co-accused Suraj Kumar he has been made accused in the present matter. 4. He further submitted that except the statement of co-accused and confessional statement of the applicant, there is no other evidence against the applicant on record. 5. He further submitted that as per prosecution when co-accused Suraj Kumar and Sangeeta were arrested then on their pointing out some bones of the deceased and her belongings were recovered and admittedly, there is no recovery either from the possession of the applicant or on his pointing out. 6. He further submitted that co-accused Sangeeta and Suraj have already been released on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of the Court and their bail orders have been annexed at page 94 and 97 of the paper book and on facts case of applicant is on better footing than them. 7. He further submitted that however, applicant was not having any previous criminal history but on the basis of the statement of co- accused and confessional statement of the applicant, he has also been made accused in two other cases and his criminal history has been explained in the instant bail application. 8. He further submitted that in the present, applicant is in jail since 7.6.2024 i.e. for last more than 9 months. 9. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. From the record, it reflects that applicant has been made accused in the present matter on the basis of statement of co- accused Suraj Kumar. 12. Record also suggests that except the statement of the co- accused and confessional statement of the applicant, there is no other evidence against the applicant on record and admittedly, nothing incriminating could be recovered either from the possession of the applicant or on his pointing out. 13. Record further suggests that recovery of the bones of the deceased and her belongings were made on the pointing out of the co-accused Suraj and Sangeeta. 14. Further co-accused Suraj and Sangeeta both have been released on bail by this Court and it appears that on facts, case of applicant is on better footing than them. 15. Further, however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of two other cases but it appears that applicant was not having any previous criminal history and on the basis of statement of co-accused and confessional statement of the applicant, he has been made accused in these two cases and his criminal history has been explained in the instant bail application. 16. Further, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 7.6.2024 i.e. for last more than 9 months. 17. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 18. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 19. Let the applicant-Manoj Ram, 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. 20. 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. 21. 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 :- 10.3.2025 Ankita Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad