Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:81282 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16497 of 2025 Applicant :- Gulfam Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- J.B. Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri J.B. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vijay Kumar, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 377 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 3(5) BNS, Police Station- Sardhana, District- Meerut, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that however, applicant is brother of the deceased and as per allegation made in the FIR, he by causing injury to his brother committed his murder but entire allegation levelled against the applicant is totally false. 4. He further submitted that actually applicant did the job in Rajasthan and on the date of incident, he was in Rajasthan. He further submitted that during investigation, informant himself moved an application to the higher authorities in this regard and when he was examined by the trial court then he also categorically stated that on the date of incident, applicant was in Rajasthan and from the statements of informant and other witnesses recorded by the trial court, which have been annexed along with the instant bail application, it reflects, principal accused in the present murder is co-accused Gajala, the wife of the deceased. He further submitted that from these statements, complicity of the applicant could not be revealed. 5. He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter, he is in jail since 14.08.2024 i.e. for last more than eight months. 6. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that FIR of the present case was lodged by father of the applicant and applicant is specifically named in the FIR and he was the sole accused and as per FIR, he, by causing head injury to his brother, committed his murder. 7. He further submitted that it reflects, as applicant is the son of informant, therefore, after the FIR, he started saving him and only due to this reason, during trial, he stated that on the date of incident, applicant was in Rajasthan and actually murder of the deceased was committed by his wife i.e. co-accused Gajala, therefore, no reliance can be placed on his testimony and considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, applicant should not be released on bail. 8. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case. 9. Applicant is brother of the deceased and as per FIR, which was lodged by his father, he was the person, who, by causing head injury, committed murder of his brother but it reflects, after lodgment of the FIR, informant himself moved an application to the higher authority disclosing the fact that on the date of incident, applicant was in Rajasthan. 10. Further, during trial, informant and two other witnesses have been examined and from their statements, complicity of the applicant could not be revealed. Further, from the statement of P.W.1 i.e. informant of the case, it reflects, on the date of incident, applicant was in Rajasthan. Further, from the statements of these witnesses, it reflects, co-accused Gajala, the wife of the deceased, committed his murder. Further, however, all these witnesses are closed family members of the applicant but they appear to be eye- witnesses, therefore, it appears, after their statements, no witness is left, who can dispose against the applicant as there is no other eye- witness account, therefore, chances of conviction of applicant in the present matter, after considering statements of these witnesses, appears to be quite remote. 11. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter, he is in jail since August 2024 i.e. for last more than eight months. 12. Further, law is settled, bail application of an accused should not be dismissed for punitive purpose. 13. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 14. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 15. Let the applicant- Gulfam 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. 16. 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. 17. 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 :- 15.5.2025 KK Patel Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad