Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:35570 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8579 of 2025 Applicant :- Ritik Sonkar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Chowdhury 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 Rajiv Chowdhury, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned Brief Holder 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) with regard to the murder of brother of the informant and during investigation through the statement of alleged eye witness Sonu applicant was made accused in the present matter but even from his statement it reflects, role of causing firearm injury to the deceased has been assigned by him to co-accused Vishal Sonkar. 5. He further submits, however, there is also CCTV footage of the incident but from the CCTV footage also it could not be reflected that applicant caused any injury to the deceased. He further submits, except witness Sonu there is no other eye witness account. 6. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 23.12.2024. 7. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 9. Applicant is not named in the FIR and sole eye witness Sonu disclosed his name in his statement recorded during investigation but from his statement it reflects, role of causing firearm injury to the deceased has been assigned to co-accused Vishal Sonkar. 10. Further, however, there is CCTV footage of the incident on record but from the details of the same, it could not be reflected that applicant caused firearm injury to the deceased. 11. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 23.12.2024. 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 - Ritik Sonkar 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 :- 11.3.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad