1 Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:88457 Reserved On:- 16.05.2025 Delivered On:- 23.05.2025 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15456 of 2024 Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Gaur,Praveen Kumar Pal,Ravindra Yadav,Shailendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Santosh Kumar Shukla Hon'ble Siddharth, J. 1. Heard Shri Praveen Kumar Pal, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Kamal Dev Mishra, holding brief of Shri Santosh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. 2. There are allegations in the F.I.R that on 24.10.2023 the informant along with Sanjay had gone to ease themselves when they found headless dead body a man lying in the agricultural field of Sanjay Rajput. F.I.R was lodged against unknown accused on 25.04.2023. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the inquest and post-mortem of the dead body of deceased was done as of unknown person. In the statement of informant he did not disclosed the name of applicant. Subsequently the head of deceased was recovered from canal on 09.11.2023. The head was identified to be of one, Pramod. It was alleged that Pramod had enticed away niece of applicant, Santosh and it was suspected that the applicant has got the murder of Pramod committed with the help of his relatives. 2 4. Counsel for the applicant also submits that the dead body of head of deceased was recovered from different places. There is no D.N.A test conducted for matching the dead body recovered from the head subsequently recovered. The motive assigned to the applicant that Pramod is abducted the married niece of applicant is the only ground for his implication which is not supported by any independent witness. The other co-accused, namely, Vimal Kumar Raidas, Bhanu Pratap, Mahesh & Ramesh @ Kallu, have already been enlarged on bail vide Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 9312 of 2024, 9453 of 2024 and 10030 of 2024. It is a case of circumstantial evidence. The applicant is in jail since 10.11.2023 and has no criminal history to his credit. Trial will take time to conclude. 5. On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail. 6. 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, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677 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. 7. Let the applicant, Santosh Kumar, involved in Case Crime No. 936 of 2023, under Sections- 302, 364, 201, 34 IPC, Police Station- Kotwali Auraiya, District- Auraiya, 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. 3 (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 misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails 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. 8. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 4 9. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 23.05.2025 Rohit Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad