Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:74238 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14538 of 2025 Applicant :- Ajeet Bind Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Swarup,Jai Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Jai Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA, for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.19 of 2025, under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) BNS, Police Station Sarai Mamrej, District Prayagraj during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that it is a case of circumstantial evidence and during investigation name of applicant was surfaced in the present matter through the statement of co-accused Ravi and however, as per prosecution apart from statement of co-accused and confessional statement of applicant, there is also evidence that co-accused Rahul transferred Rs.4000/- in the account of applicant and as per allegation, applicant was hired criminal but actually applicant although received Rs.4000/- from co-accused Rahul but subsequently he returned Rs.3500/- to him and this fact is even evident from case diary of the present case and, therefore, it cannot be said that applicant was hired criminal. 4. He further submits that except above evidence there is no other evidence against the applicant on record. 5. He further submits that applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 3.4.2025. 6. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that apart from the present case applicant is also having criminal history of one another case but he fairly conceded, said case relates to minor offence. He however could not dispute the other argument on facts advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 8. It is a case of circumstantial evidence and during investigation Ravi and wife of the deceased, namely, Shivani were made accused on the ground that they were having illicit relationship and when they were arrested then they disclosed the name of the applicant. 9. Further, however, apart from the statement of co-accused and the confessional statement of applicant, there is also evidence that co-accused Rahul transferred Rs.4000/- in the account of the applicant and as per prosecution applicant was hired criminal but considering the fact that subsequently applicant transferred back Rs. 3500/- in his account, the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant in this regard cannot be ruled out at this stage. 10. Further, except the above evidence there is no other evidence against the applicant on record. 11. Further, however, it appears that applicant apart from the present case is also having criminal history of one another case and he did not explain his criminal history in the instant bail application but it appears, that case relates to minor offence. 12. Further, applicant is in jail in the present matter since 03.4.2025. 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-Ajeet Bind 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 :- 8.5.2025 SKM Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad