Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:85603 Reserved on 14.05.2025 Delivered on 21.05.2025 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14317 of 2024 Applicant :- Swaraj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Pathak,Harshit Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- Diwakar Mishra,G.A. Hon'ble Siddharth,J. Heard Sri Harshit Pathak, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Diwakar Mishra, learned counsel for the informant; learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. There are allegations against unknown accused in the first information report regarding commission offence of murder of one unknown person whose dead body was recovered on the road. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that first information report has been lodged after six days of the incident for which there is no explanation. No missing report was lodged regarding missing of the deceased by his family members. On 20.09.2023 i.e., after about four months an application was given to the police by father of the deceased on suspicion that co-accused, Manju, wife of the deceased along with co-accused, Ajay, with whom she had love affair has caused murder of the deceased. On the basis of confessional statement of co-accused, Manju and some photographs of the applicant recovered along with her, applicant was implicated in this case. After 4 months 23 days of registration of first information report statements of some witnesses were recorded wherein they alleged that they have seen the deceased going with co-accused, Ajay. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that bail application of co-accused, Ajay, has already been rejected by coordinate bench of this court but the role of the applicant is different from co-accused, Ajay. There is no allegation against him that he was having any illicit relation-ship with the wife of the deceased. Learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail application along with learned AGA and have pointed out that the co-accused, Ajay, with the help of applicant and other co-accused committed the murder of the deceased. He has pointed out to the CDR details collected by the Investigating Officer regarding talk on mobile phone because co-accused, Manju and Ajay. After hearing rival contentions of the parties, this court finds that there is no credible evidence against the applicant collected by the Investigating Officer. He has been implicated in this case on the basis of suspicion. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping 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 and recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. Let the applicant, Swaraj, involved in Case Crime No.97 of 2023, under Sections 302, 120-B I.P.C, Police Station Gagalhedi, District- Saharanpur 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (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, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 21.5.2025 SS Digitally signed by :- SURENDER SINGH NARANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad