Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:81461 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16663 of 2025 Applicant :- Raj Jaiswal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amrendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Amrendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 409 of 2024, under Section 103(1) B.N.S., Police Station Mughalsarai, District Chandauli during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however, applicant was named in the FIR but admittedly it is not a case of direct evidence and no one could see the real incident. He further submits, merely on the basis of suspicion informant disclosed the name of the applicant in the FIR. 4. He further submits, as per prosecution, applicant confessed his guilt before two witnesses namely Ashish and Lala Chauhan but in fact applicant never confessed his guilt before anyone. 5. He further submits, post mortem report suggests that cause of death of the deceased could not be ascertained and his viscera was preserved and however till date viscera report could not be received but even if in the viscera report it will be found that deceased died due to consumption of poison then also it cannot be said that applicant administered poison to him as there is no such allegation against the applicant. 6. He further submits, it is a case of no evidence and post mortem report also completely falsifies the statement of witnesses namely Ashish and Lala Chauhan. 7. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 30.09.2024 i.e. for last more than six months. 8. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 10. However, as per allegation, applicant committed the murder of the deceased but it is a case of circumstantial evidence and it reflects, except the extra judicial confession of the applicant before two witnesses there is no other evidence against the applicant on record and in the light of the post mortem report, prima facie, statements of witnesses Ashish and Lala Chauhan appear to be doubtful as, according to the post mortem report cause of death of the deceased could not be ascertained. 11. Further, however, till date viscera report of the deceased is not on record but as there is neither any allegation nor any evidence that applicant administered any poison to the deceased, therefore, argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant in this regard cannot be ruled out at this stage. 12. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 30.09.2024 i.e. for last more than six months. 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 - Raj Jaiswal 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 :- 16.5.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad