Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:39884 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25102 of 2023 Applicant :- Gautam Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Satyendra Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Satyendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant-Gautam Singh seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.67 of 2021, under Sections 302, 34, 365, 201, 120-B IPC, P.S. Garhmukteshwar, District Hapur. 4. This is a second bail application. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected vide order dated 11.4.2023 passed by coordinate Bench of this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.1967 of 2022. 5. The report of the trial court was called for by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 4.2.2025 regarding the reason for delay in trial. The report of the Addl. District and Sessions Judge-Ist, Hapur duly forwarded by the District Judge, Hapur dated 12.2.2025 is on record. The same goes to show that the trial is at advance stage. 6. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 13.2.2021 by Deepu alias Vikrant against unknown person under Section 365 IPC alleging therein that his brother Ram Kumar alias Monu had gone out on 12.2.2021 at about 6 p.m. but since then he is missing. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the applicant is not named in the FIR but he has been made as an accused during investigation in which his name as surfaced after his arrest along with co-accused Raju Singh. It is argued that the dead-body of the deceased was recovered from the sugar cane field. It is argued that co-accused Raju Singh handed over his battery operated rickshaw to Sadhu, the brother-in-law and thereafter the battery operated rickshaw of the deceased was recovered from the house of Sadhu. The implication of the applicant in the present case is false. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 19 of the affidavit and is in jail since 15.2.2021. 8. Per contra learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and argued that on the pointing out of the applicant and co-accused Raju Singh, the dead-body of the deceased was recovered from the sugar cane field. The battery operated rickshaw was recovered from the house of brother-in-law of co-accused Raju Singh. It is further submitted that bail of co-accused Raju Singh has been rejected by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 2.12.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.23174 of 2022 and by the said order the trial of the matter has also been expedited, as such bail application of the applicant be rejected. 9. After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the dead-body of the deceased has been recovered on the pointing out of the applicant and co-accused Raju Singh. The bail application of co-accused Raju Singh has been rejected by coordinate Bench of this Court. The trial is at advance stage. The same has also been expedited by a coordinate Bench of this Court while rejecting the bail application of co-accused Raju Singh. 10. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find it a fit case for bail, hence, the bail application is rejected. (Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 19.3.2025 Gaurav Kuls Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad