Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:66771 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11318 of 2025 Applicant :- Intzar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amar Jeet Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sushil Kumar Pandey Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Amar Jeet Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sushil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA, for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.478 of 2024, under Section 103(1) and 238 BNS, Police Station Lohiya Nagar, District Meerut during pendency of the trial. 3. FIR of the present case was lodged on 9.10.2024 against the applicant and co-accused Burhan and according to the FIR on 4.10.2024 at about 6.00 PM in the evening applicant and co- accused Burhan had taken the husband of the informant and thereafter on 8.10.2024 his dead body was recovered. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that from the perusal of the FIR it reflects that it has been lodged on the basis of the information given by Sajid and Talib that applicant and co- accused Burhan had taken the deceased on 4.10.2024 at 6.00 PM in the evening and when their statements were recorded then they also reiterated the version of the FIR but from the perusal of the post mortem report of the deceased which was conducted on 8.10.2024 it reflects that he died about 1-2 weeks prior and, therefore, post mortem report prima facie completely belies the allegation that on 4.10.2024 , i.e., about four days before from the date of post mortem applicant and co-accused had taken the deceased. 5. He further submits that even except the evidence of last seen and the fact that as per prosecution on the pointing out of the applicant one wooden stick was recovered, there is no evidence against applicant and considering the fact that wooden stick is a common tool, its recovery cannot be said to be incriminating one. 6. He further submits that however it is a case of circumstantial evidence but prosecution failed to connect the applicant with the instant crime with cogent evidence. 7. He further submits that applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 10.10.2024, i.e., for the last more than six months. 8. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant although opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 10. However, as per prosecution applicant and co-accused had taken the deceased from his shop where he was working and subsequently after four days his dead body was recovered but from the perusal of the post mortem report which was conducted on 8.10.2024 it reflects that that deceased might have died about one-two weeks before. Considering this fact the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant that the post mortem report belies the allegation against the applicant that he had taken the deceased along with co-accused on 4.10.2024 at 6.00 PM in the evening cannot be ruled out at this stage. 11. Further, however, apart from the evidence of last seen as per prosecution when applicant was arrested then on his pointing out one wooden stick was also recovered but the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant in this regard also cannot be ruled out at this stage. 12. Further, applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 10.10.2024, i.e., for the last more than six months. 13. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 14. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 15. Let the applicant-Intzar 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. 16. 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. 17. 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 :- 29.4.2025 SKM Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad