Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:82538 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16742 of 2025 Applicant :- Bhagirath Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ganesh Shankar Dubey,Sudhir Kumar Agarwal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Sudhir Kumar Agarwal, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 272 of 2024, under Section 103(1) B.N.S., Police Station Bhoganipur, District Kanpur Dehat during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however, applicant is husband of the deceased and as per allegation, by causing fire arm injury to his wife, he committed her murder but entire allegation leveled against applicant is totally false. 4. He further submits, there is no eye witness account and actually applicant was Guard and deceased committed suicide by his licensee gun. 5. He further submits, during trial informant and witness Dinesh did not support the prosecution case and according to them also deceased herself committed suicide and their statements have been annexed alongwith instant bail application. 6. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 19.09.2024. 7. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant is husband of the deceased and his wife died due to fire arm injuries in his home and applicant in the entire bail application did not make any averment that deceased committed suicide by using the licensee gun of the applicant therefore, it reflects, applicant failed to explain the death of his wife which, prima facie appears to be homicidal death, therefore, he should not be released on bail. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 9. Applicant is husband of the deceased and as per allegation he by causing fire arm injury to his wife committed her murder, however, it appears, during trial informant of the case and landlord of the applicant did not support the prosecution case but they were not the eye witnesses. 10. Further, however, as per learned counsel for the applicant deceased committed suicide by using his licensed gun as applicant was Guard but no such defence has been taken by the applicant in the instant bail application and from perusal of entire bail application it could not be reflected, how deceased died due to fire arm injury in the house of the applicant. 11. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 12. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is rejected. 13. 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 :- 17.5.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad