Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:90304 Reserved On:-16.05.2025 Delivered On:-26.05.2025 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14967 of 2024 Applicant :- Kamlesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bhuvnesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Umair Mahmood,Vivek Pandey Hon'ble Siddharth,J. Heard Sri Bhuvnesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Manju Thakur, learned A.G.A-I for the State and perused the material on record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Kamlesh, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 52/2024, under Sections 302, 201, 34, 120-B of IPC, Police Station- Dhampur, District- Bijnor, during pendency of trial. There are allegations in the F.I.R., that younger brother of the informant, Mahendra Singh, aged about 45 years, had left on 29.04.2024 from his house for going to Dhampur, but when he did not return, missing report was lodged on 30.01.2024 and his search was made. Thereafter, the informant came to know that the wife of his brother, Kamlesh Devi, (the applicant) had physical relationship with co-accused, Manoj, which was opposed by his brother, Mahendra, therefore, he has suspicion that the applicant with the help of co-accused, Manoj, and Vikash, have caused the murder of his brother and his dead body has been hidden somewhere. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the dead body of the deceased was recovered on 06.02.2024 on the pointing out of co-accused, Manoj. Manoj was arrested on the same day. On the basis of his confessional statement role of conspiracy was assigned to the applicant. Statement of one, Jitendra, was also recorded, who stated that there was rumour regarding illicit relationship of the applicant with co-accused, Manoj. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the prosecution has concocted false story. Except the confessional statement of co-accused, Manoj, against her there is no other evidence against applicant. She has been falsely implicated in this case. Applicant has no criminal history to her credit and is languishing in jail since 07.02.2024. The trial in the aforesaid case is not likely to be concluded in near future. Ms. Manju Thakur, learned A.G.A-Ist, has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre-trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. She has pointed out to the C.C.T.V., footage collected by the investigating officer, where the co- accused, Manoj, was seen alongwith the deceased in a degree college. After hearing the rival submissions, this Court finds that there is no definite evidence or motive of the crime except the confessional statement of co-accused against the applicant. She is already languishing in jail since 07.02.2024. 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 her 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 her 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 Abhishek Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad