Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:77901 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13105 of 2025 Applicant :- Nasim Alam Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Namit Srivastava,Parul Srivastava Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Namit Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Jhamman Ram, 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. 292 of 2024, under Sections 302, 201, 120B IPC, Police Station Kubersthan, District Kushinagar during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however, applicant was not named in the FIR but during investigation he has been made accused in the present matter on the ground that he had conversation with co-accused Seema i.e. wife of alleged deceased and location of his mobile phone was also found near the place of incident and except this, there is no other evidence against the applicant on record. 4. He further submits, merely on the basis of above evidence, at this stage, it cannot be said that applicant involved in the present crime along with others. 5. He further submits, even till date dead body of the deceased could not be recovered, therefore, it cannot be said that deceased has been murdered. 6. He further submits, deceased eloped on 03.06.2024 but FIR of the present case was lodged on 19.09.2024 i.e. after more than three months through an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and even application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved on 29.06.2024 i.e. after more than three weeks, therefore, there is delay in lodging the FIR too. 7. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 05.03.2025. 8. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 10. It is a case of circumstantial evidence and during investigation applicant has been made accused in the present matter on the ground that he had conversation with the wife of the deceased namely Seema one of the co-accused and location of his mobile phone was also found near the place of incident and it reflects, except the above evidences there is no other evidence against the applicant. This Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that in absence of any other corroborative evidence on the basis of above evidences, it is hard to believe that applicant involved in the present crime. 11. Further, even till date the dead body of the deceased could not be recovered and considering this fact, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that at this stage, till date it cannot be even said that deceased has been murdered, cannot be ruled out. 12. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 05.03.2025. 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 - Nasim Alam 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 :- 13.5.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad