Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:6876 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 53534 of 2023 Applicant :- Jaiveer Singh @ Banti Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ankit Yadav,Sujeet Kumar,Sunil Vashisth Counsel for Opposite Party :- Brijesh Kumar Srivastava,G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Anand Prakash Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ankit Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Brijesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 185 of 2023, under Sections 302 & 201 of I.P.C., Police Station - Bah, District - Agra, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the informant's son is stated to have gone to the house of applicant's brother, who happens to be his uncle-in-law (Fufa) and had taken Rs. One Lakh along with him, thereby the applicant and other family members are stated to have taken the dead body of the deceased to the house of the informant and informed that he had committed suicide in their basement. The dead body was cremated. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by about nine days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has also stated that the inquest or the postmortem examination of the deceased person was never conducted. The instant FIR is just a misuse of process of law and is based on speculation. There is no direct or ocular evidence against the applicant. 7. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 02.09.2023 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned State Law Officer have vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history. 9. In light of the judgement of the Supreme Court passed in Niranjan Singh and another vs Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote and others AIR 1980 SC 785, this Court has avoided detailed examination of the evidence and elaborate documentation of the merits of the case as no party should have the impression that his case has been prejudiced. A prima facie satisfaction of case is needed but it is not the same as an exhaustive exploration of the merits in the order itself. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the settled law of the Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690 and Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant- Jaiveer Singh @ Banti, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence. (ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 13. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date:- 15.1.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad