Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:74174 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12282 of 2025 Applicant :- Ram Ikbal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Nitin Mukesh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Nitin Mukesh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vijay Kumar, learned AGA-I for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 26 of 2024, under Section 302 IPC and Section 4/25 Arms Act, Police Station Bilaspur, District Rampur during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, FIR of the present case was lodged against unknown persons with regard to murder of the father of the informant but during investigation when the second statement of the informant was recorded then he sated that his neighbor Raju informed his mother that he heard that applicant was stating to his mother that as he committed the murder of father of the informant in similar fashion he will also commit her murder and merely on the basis of such absurd evidence applicant has been made accused in the present matter. 4. He further submits, on the basis of above mentioned inadmissible and absurd evidence it cannot be said that applicant was the person, who committed the murder of the deceased. 5. He further submits, as per allegation, when applicant was arrested then on his pointing out recovery of weapon used in the crime was made but in absence of any corroborative evidence it cannot be said that applicant committed the murder of the deceased. He further submits, entire recovery is false and planted one. 6. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 18.03.2024 i.e. for last more than a year. 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. It is a case of circumstantial evidence and it reflects, FIR of the present case was lodged against unknown persons and when the second statement of the informant was recorded during investigation then he disclosed the name of applicant but considering his second statement, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that on the basis of inadmissible and absurd evidence applicant has been made accused in the present matter, cannot be ruled out at this stage. 10. Further, however, as per prosecution from the possession of applicant the weapon used in the crime was also recovered but this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that in absence of any other corroborative evidence merely on the basis of such recovery at this stage it cannot be said that applicant committed the murder of the deceased. 11. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 18.03.2024 i.e. for last more than a year. 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 - Ram Ikbal 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 :- 7.5.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad