Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:89154 Reserved on 21.5.2025 Delivered on 26.5.2025 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13931 of 2024 Applicant :- Wakeel Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Azhar Hussain,Ravitendra Pratap Singh Chandel Counsel for Opposite Party :- Ajay Dubey,G.A. Hon'ble Siddharth,J. Heard Sri Azhar Hussain, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Manu Tripathi, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Ajay Dubey, learned counsel for the informant; learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Wakeel, with a prayer to release him on bail in Session Trial No.2651 of 2021, Case Crime No. 675 of 2020, under Sections 302, 394, 201, 411 & 120-B IPC, Police Station Eatmaddaula, District- Agra, during pendency of trial. There are allegations in the FIR against unknown accused of causing murder of the brother, sister-in-law and nephew of the informant by way of burning. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant is alleged to have been arrested alongwith co-accused, Subash and recovery of a country-made pistol, one live cartridge and one used cartridge were recovered from his possession. From the possession of co-accused, Subhash, a bag of the deceased in which number of documents of the deceased and Rs.79,550/- was recovered. Trial has commenced and PW-1, PW-2 & PW-3 have been examined. Leaned counsel for the applicant has submitted that it is a case of circumstantial evidence. There is no definite evidence against the applicant. He is in jail since 3.9.2020. As per the report of trial court dated 16.7.2024, five prosecution witnesses have been examined. Thereafter prosecution gave an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. and therefore evidence of remaining witnesses could not be recorded. Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant. They have submitted that there is no justification for the applicant being enlarged on bail at this stage, when the trial is about to be concluded. Allegations against the applicant are serious. After considering the rival contentions, this Court finds that applicant is in jail since 3.9.2020. He does not appears to have any other criminal history to his credit. It is a case of circumstantial evidence. Co- accused, Rakesh, has been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.36089 of 2022 vide order dated 31.10.2023, while bail application of co-accused, Gajendra and Subhash, has been rejected by co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 16.5.2022. This Court finds that three years have been passed when bail application of co-accused, Gajendra and Subhash, was rejected. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 26.5.2025 Ruchi Agrahari Digitally signed by :- RUCHI AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad