Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:91807 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16823 of 2025 Applicant :- Suraj Saini Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Neeraj Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Neeraj Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr. S.B.Maurya, learned AGA-I, for the State. 2. The instant application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 573 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 238 and 140(1) BNS, Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that initially FIR of the present case was lodged against unknown persons under Section 140(3) BNS but after recovery of dead body on the pointing out of the applicant, he has been made accused in the present matter and case has been converted under Section 103(1) BNS. 4. He further submits that as per prosecution, apart from recovery of dead body of the deceased on the pointing out of the applicant, from his possession mobile phone of the deceased was also recovered but entire alleged recovery is totally false and baseless. 5. He further submits that even from the recovery memo which has been annexed along with the instant bail application it reflects that recovery of the dead body was made from a place which was accessible to all. 6. He further submits that merely on the basis of above recovery without any corroborative evidence, it cannot be said that applicant committed the murder of the deceased. 7. He further submits that apart from the present case applicant is also having criminal history of one another case which has been explained in the instant bail application and said case relates to the offences under Sections 363 and 366 IPC and in that case applicant is on bail. 8 He further submits that in the present matter applicant is in jail since 3.9.2024, i.e., for the last more more than eight months. 9. Per contra, learned AGA although opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by the learned counel for the applicant. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. It is a case of circumstantial evidence and it reflects that during investigation applicant has been made accused in the present matter and as per prosecution from the possession of the applicant mobile phone of the deceased was recovered and on his pointing out dead body of the deceased was also recovered but from the perusal of recovery memo it reflects that alleged recovery of dead body was made from a place which was accessible to all. Considering the fact that there is no other corroborative evidence against the applicant on record, the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant that merely on the basis of above recovery it cannot be said that applicant involved in commission of the present crime, cannot be ruled out at this stage. 12. Further, apart from the present case applicant is also having criminal history of one another case which has been explained in the instant bail application and in that case applicant is on bail. 13. Further, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 3.9.2024, i.e., for the last more than eight months. 14. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 15. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 16. Let the applicant-Suraj Saini 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. 17. 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. 18. 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 :- 28.5.2025 SKM Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad