Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:38303 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8963 of 2025 Applicant :- Mohd. Ahmad @ Mulla Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Firdos Ahmad,Vinod Kumar Yadav 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 Vinod Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vijay Kumar, learned AGA-I for the State-respondent. 3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 544 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 3(5), 61(2) BNS, Police Station Swar, District Rampur, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 4. FIR of the present case was lodged on 3.12.2024 against the applicant and two others and according to the FIR on 3.12.2024 at about 7 pm in the night, applicant alongwith two others committed the murder of the nephew of the informant. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that on the basis of false allegations, applicant has been made accused in the present matter and admittedly, informant was not an eye witness. 6. He further submitted that however, during investigation witnesses Aqueel Ahmad and Zameer Ahmad tried to state that they were eye witnesses but they also did not state that applicant committed the murder of the deceased. 7. He further submitted that both the alleged eye witnesses categorically stated that co-accused Abrar, Imran, Gufran and Asim committed the murder of the deceased and from their statements it reflects that applicant also conspired for the alleged crime. 8. He further submitted that except the bald and verbal allegation of conspiracy, there is no cogent evidence of conspiracy against the applicant. 9. He further submitted that however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of 14 other cases but his entire criminal history has been explained in the supplementary affidavit filed in support to the instant bail application and except two cases, all the remaining 12 cases were old one and all the cases relate to minor offences. 10. He further submitted that in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 3.12.2024. 11. Per contra, learned AGA however, opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 12. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 13. However, from the perusal of the FIR, it reflects that applicant alongwith two others committed the murder of the deceased but admittedly informant was not an eye witness. 14. From the record, it reflects that however, witnesses Aqueel Ahmad and Zameer Ahmad claimed themselves to be the eye witnesses but they did not state that applicant committed the murder of the deceased. As per their statements recorded during investigation, co-accused Abrar, Imran, Gufran and Asim committed the murder of the deceased by causing fire arm injury to him. However, according to them, applicant involved in the conspiracy but it reflects except the bald and verbal allegation of conspiracy, there is no cogent evidence in this regard against the applicant on record. 15. Further, however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of 14 other cases but his criminal history has been explained in the supplementary affidavit filed in support to the instant bail appliaction and it reflects out of 14 cases, 13 cases were old one from the year 1981 to 2013 and all the cases relate to minor offences. 16. Further, law is settled that if otherwise case of bail is made out then merely on the basis of criminal antecedents, ordinarily bail application of an accused should not be withheld. 17. Further, in the present case, applicant is in jail since 23.12.2025. 18. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 19. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 20. Let the applicant-Mohd. Ahmad @ Mulla, 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. 21. 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. 22. 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 :- 18.3.2025 Ankita Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad