Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:34633 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8342 of 2025 Applicant :- Kusum Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Satyendra Kumar Singh 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 Satyendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajeev Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State. 3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 532 of 2024, under Sections 3(5), 103(1), 61(2) B.N.S., Police Station Bhelupur, District Varanasi during pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, FIR of the present case was lodged against seven persons (non applicant) and according to the FIR nominated accused persons committed the murder of the brother of the informant by causing firearm injuries to him. He further submits, during investigation when co-accused Manoj Chauhan was arrested and his statement was recorded on 06.12.2024 then he disclosed the name of applicant. 5. He further submits, however, after two days i.e. 08.12.2024 when the statement of Sonu Vishwakarma was recorded then he however stated that applicant provided pistol to co-accused Vishal Sonkar and thereafter Vishal Sonkar caused firearm injury to the deceased but his statement with regard to applicant appears to be doubtful and it appears, as co-accused Manoj Chauhan has already disclosed the name of applicant, therefore, through the statement of witness Sonu Vishwakarma Investigating Officer developed the story with regard to applicant and considering this fact, no reliance can be placed on the statement of witness Sonu Vishwakarma. He further submits, admittedly applicant did not cause any injury to the deceased. 6. He further submits, applicant is lady and she is not having any criminal history and in the present matter she is in jail since 06.12.2024. 7. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted, however, name of applicant was surfaced through the statement of co-accused Manoj Chauhan but witness Sonu Vishwakarma also categorically stated that applicant handed over pistol to co-accused Vishal Sonkar, therefore, it cannot be said that applicant is innocent, however, he fairly conceded during investigation Investigating Officer also procured CCTV footage of the incident but in the CCTV footage applicant could not be seen. He further could not dispute the fact that statement of Sonu Vishwakarma was recorded after the statement of co-accused Manoj Chauhan who had already disclosed the name of applicant. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 9. It reflects, applicant was not named in the FIR and during investigation it was revealed that she handed over pistol to co- accused Vishal Sonkar and thereafter he committed the murder of the deceased and this fact has been stated by witness Sonu but statement of Sonu Vishwakarma was recorded on 08.12.2024 and before his statement two days before name of the applicant had already surfaced in the present matter through the statement of co- accused Manoj Chauhan and considering this fact, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant with regard to the statement of witness Sonu Vishwakarma, cannot be ruled out. 10. Further, from the details of CCTV footage, which was noted by the Investigating Officer in the case diary and which was produced by learned AGA during the course of argument, it reflects that applicant was not visible in the CCTV footage. 11. Further, admittedly applicant did not cause any injury to the deceased and applicant is a lady and she is not having any criminal history and in the present matter she is in jail since 06.12.2024. 12. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 13. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 14. Let the applicant - Kusum Devi 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. 15. 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. 16. 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 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad