Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:82848 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15866 of 2025 Applicant :- Vijay Nishad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amar Nath Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sapan Kumar Singh Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Brij Lal Shukla, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Amar Nath Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sapan Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Jhamman Ram, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 531 of 2024, under Sections 103(1) 238 BNS, Police Station- Khorabar, District- Gorakhpur, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that however, applicant is named in the FIR along with three others but it is a case of circumstantial evidence and there is no eye-witness account and it reflects, merely on the basis of suspicion, he has been made accused in the FIR of the present case along with others. 4. He further submitted that however, as per prosecution, witness Sonu in his statement stated that applicant confessed his guilt before him and apart from the extra judicial confession of the applicant before this witness, as per prosecution, when applicant was arrested then on his pointing out weapon used in the crime was also recovered but entire recovery is totally false and even from the recovery memo, it reflects, the recovery was made from an open place, which was accessible to all. 5. He further submitted that except the above evidence, there is no other evidence against the applicant on record 6. He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 18.09.2024 i.e. for last more than six months. 7. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant however, opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. However, they submitted that apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of one another case but they fairly conceded, that case relates to minor offence. 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, except the extra judicial confession of the applicant before witness Sonu and the fact that as per allegation, on his pointing out, weapon used in the crime was recovered, there is no other evidence against the applicant on record. Law is settled, extra judicial confession is a weak piece of evidence. Further, as far as recovery of alleged weapon used in the crime is concerned, it reflects, the alleged recovery was made from an open place, which was accessible to all. 10. Further, however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of one another case but that case relates to minor offence. 11. Further, applicant is in jail in the present matter since 18.09.2024 i.e. for last more than six months. 12. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 13. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 14. Let the applicant- Vijay Nishad 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. 15. 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. 16. 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 KK Patel Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad