Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:86156 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15770 of 2025 Applicant :- Rihana Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Pandey,Jaideep Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shams Uz Zaman Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shams Uz Zaman, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Jhamman Ram, learned AGA-I, for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release her on bail in Case Crime No.38 of 2025, under Sections 103(1) and 61 (2) BNS, Police Station Chhaprauli, District Baghpat during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that initially FIR of the present case was lodged under Section 140 BNS but subsequently, when dead body of the father of the informant was recovered then case was converted under Section 103(1) BNS. 4. He further submits that however nobody was named in the FIR but during investigation when the statement of the informant was recorded then he raised suspicion against the family members of the applicant and thereafter when son of the applicant was arrested then he confessed his guilt and he also disclosed the name of the applicant. 5. He further submits that it is a case of circumstantial evidence and except statement of co-accused and confessional statement of the applicant before the Police, there is no other cogent evidence against the applicant on record. 6. He further submits that applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter she is in jail since 26.2.2025, i.e., for almost three months. 7. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that actually applicant and her family members are the real culprits and they committed the murder of the deceased but they fairly conceded that except the statement of the co-accused and confessional statement of the applicant, there is no other cogent evidence against the applicant on record. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 9. It is a case of circumstantial evidence and it reflects that except the statement of the co-accused and confessional statement of the applicant before the Police, there is no other cogent evidence against the applicant on record. 10. Further, applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter she is in jail in since 26.2.2025, i.e., for almost three months. 11. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 12. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 13. Let the applicant-Rihana 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 her 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 her 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. 14. 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. 15. 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 :- 21.5.2025 SKM Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad