Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:89773 Reserved On:-22.05.2025 Delivered On:-27.05.2025 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14831 of 2025 Applicant :- Hitesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Kumar,Ankit Kumar Pal,Avanish Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Siddharth,J. Heard Sri Avanish Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Gambhir Singh, learned counsel for the informant; learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Hitesh, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 41 of 2025, under Sections- 191(2), 140(1), 103(1), 61(2), 3(5) of B.N.S., Police Station- Shiwalakala, District- Bijnor, during pendency of trial. The prosecution case is that co-accused, Parul, wife of deceased, brother of informant, had affair with co-accused, Vineet, and they along with another named co-accused, Mani Sharma, and 7-8 unknown accused have committed murder of the brother of the informant. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that he has been falsely implicated in this case despite not being named. He had no motive to commit the alleged offence. Motive has been assigned to co-accused, Parul and Vineet, only. During investigation on the basis of statement of co-accused, Vineet, he has been assigned the role of beating deceased by belt. Co-accused, Bhuvnesh, has been assigned role of driving the car of the co-accused. No specific role was assigned to co-accused, Kishanpal, they have been implicated and assigned the role of sharing common intention with the named co-accused. He has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 16.03.2025. The trial in the aforesaid case is not likely to be concluded in near future. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant but are unable to point out anything substantial against the applicant. No incriminating recovery is alleged against the applicant. After hearing the rival contentions, this Court finds that there is tendency of implicating as many person as possible, with whom either the informant had any grudge or whom police dislikes, in cases where some of the unnamed accused are there. In the confessional statements all are assigned some role or the other to justify their implications. Those who can help the main accused are also implicated in F.I.R. or in statements of witnesses so that they may not be able to help the main accused. The applicant and co-accused have been implicated without any motive to commit the alleged offence. 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 the 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 trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the paragraph no.53 of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement 2024, (SC)LawSuit 677 and 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 :- 27.5.2025 Abhishek Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad