Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:74188 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11536 of 2025 Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Pal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Agnivesh,Jadu Nandan Yadav,Pranvesh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Pranvesh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 38 of 2024, under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Kadri Gate, District Farrukhabad during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however, applicant is sole accused and as per allegation he committed the murder of his parents and FIR of the present case was lodged by his wife but entire allegation leveled against the applicant is totally false and at the time of incident he was not present at his home and during trial sole witness of the case i.e. wife of the applicant (informant of the case) has turned hostile and in her statement recorded before the trial court she admitted the fact that at the time of incident applicant was in District Kannauj and it appears, in absence of the applicant some unknown persons committed the murder of parents of the applicant. 4. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 07.03.2024 i.e. for last more than a year. 5. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that it is a case of double murder and as per allegation made in the FIR applicant committed the murder of his parents and FIR of the present case was lodged by his wife and however his wife during trial turned hostile but as both deceased died in the house of the applicant and except the statement of the informant recorded before the trial court that applicant was not present at his home there is no other evidence in this regard on record, therefore, merely on the basis of such evidence applicant should not be benefited. 6. 6. Learned AGA further submitted, it appears, subsequently applicant won over his wife and being wife, informant did not give evidence before the trial court against the applicant, and therefore, considering these facts, bail application of the applicant should be rejected. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 8. As per allegation, applicant committed the murder of his parents and FIR of the present case was lodged by his wife and however it reflects, during trial wife of the applicant i.e. informant of the case did not support the prosecution case and has been declared hostile and in her statement recorded before the trial court she stated that applicant was not present in his house at the time of incident but considering the fact that informant is the wife of the applicant, argument advanced by learned AGA at this stage in this regard, cannot be ruled out. 9. Further, except the statement of informant recorded before the trial court there is no other evidence that applicant at the time incident was not present in his house. 10. Further, during investigation when the statement of the informant was recorded then she supported the version of the FIR, therefore, considering the above facts, on the basis of statement of the informant recorded before the trial court, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail at this stage. 11. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is rejected. 12. 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