Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:85530 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17444 of 2025 Applicant :- Sarvesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Sandeep Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Jhamman Ram, learned AGA-I for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 30 of 2025, under Sections 302, 201 IPC, Police Station Saidnagli, District J.P. Nagar (Amroha) during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however, applicant is named in the FIR and he was nephew of the deceased and as per allegation he committed his murder but FIR of the present case was lodged after more than one and half years. 4. He next submits, it is a case of circumstantial evidence and however as per allegation on the pointing out of the applicant skeleton of the body of the deceased was recovered after digging the soil but entire recovery is false and planted one and this fact is evident from the fact that within one hour from the lodgement of the FIR recovery was made. 5. He further submits, the alleged recovery was made from inside a pond and it appears, after one and half years when alleged skeleton of the deceased became visible then on the basis of false allegation firstly FIR of the present case was lodged and thereafter it has been falsely mentioned in the recovery memo that on the pointing out of the applicant skeleton of the dead body of the deceased was recovered. 6. He further submits, neither skeleton was in a position to identify nor there is any evidence that even the alleged deceased was murdered. 7. He further submits, there is no cogent evidence against the applicant which can connect him with the instant crime. 8. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 06.02.2025. 9. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for and submitted that applicant is the nephew of the deceased and on his pointing out skeleton of dead body of the deceased was recovered after digging soil but he could not dispute the fact that FIR of the present case was lodged after more than 18 months and in the FIR applicant has been named and within one hour of FIR the alleged recovery of skeleton of dead body was made. 10. Learned AGA further could not dispute the fact that recovery was made from a pond and till date it could not be ascertained how deceased died. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 12. However, applicant is nephew of the deceased and as per allegation he committed his murder and on his pointing out after digging skeleton of dead body of the deceased was recovered but it reflects, FIR of the present case was lodged against the applicant after more than 18 months. 13. Further, from the record, it reflects, the alleged recovery of skeleton of dead body was made within one hour from the lodgement of the FIR and recovery was also made from inside a pond and considering these facts, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant cannot be completely brushed aside at this stage. 14. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 06.02.2025. 15. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 16. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 17. Let the applicant - Sarvesh 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. 18. 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. 19. 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 :- 21.5.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad