HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25972 of 2025 Court No. - 66 HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. List revised. Learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State are present. Learned counsel for the first informant is not present. 2. Heard Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Puneet Kumar Sing, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record. 3. This bail application under Section 483 BNS has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant, Smt. Kamla Devi, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 169 of 2025, under Sections 103 (1), 238 BNS, Police Station Saini, District Kaushambi. 4. The allegation made in the FIR is that on 09.04. 2025, the informant namely Gautam Buddh has lodged a complaint at Police Station Saini about the missing of his brother namely Shravan Kumar, whose dead body was found in a well on 14.04.2025, near Saurai Buzurg, under Kadadhaam. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused-applicant is lady and an innocent person. She has been falsely implicated in this case crime number and is languishing in jail since 14.05.2025. She has no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of her fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the incident took place on 09.04.2025 and its FIR was lodge after 37 days i.e. on 13.05.2025 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ran Vijay Singh, Shravan Kumari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Surendra Kumar Smt. Kamla Devi .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) without giving any explanation for delay in lodging the FIR. As per the postmortem report, the cause of death uncertain hence, viscera was preserved for chemical analysis. As per the statement of the doctor, the body of the deceased was partially decomposed due to which the injury could not be ascertained and the cause of death was also not clear. The cause of death was not clear hence, viscera was preserved to know the actual cause of death of the deceased. The post mortem report does not support the prosecution version as alleged in the FIR. It is argued that the applicant has been made accused by the Investigating Officer without collecting any cogent and credible evidence against him. There is no eyewitness of the alleged incident. The Investigating officer has not collected any evidence which shows the complicity of the applicant in the present crime. There is no evidence except the confessional statement of co-accused Ramesh and applicant. It is also argued that Section 25 and 26 of the Evidence Act also say that the confession by the accused while in police custody not to be proved against accused, therefore, it cannot be treated as evidence against the applicant. Nothing incriminating article has been recovered from the possession or on her pointing out. The co- accused Ramesh himself stated in his confessional statement that he has committed the murder of the deceased and the role of committing murder has not been assigned to the applicant. Neither the applicant known to the deceased nor she had any relation with the deceased. It is further argued that after completing the investigation, investigating officer has submitted the charge sheet against the applicant on 27.05.2025. Hence, bail has been prayed for. 7. Learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts. 8. Considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out. 9. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 10. Let the accused-applicant, Smt. Kamla Devi involved in above BAIL No. 25972 of 2025 2 mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on her executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions: i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence. ii. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity. iii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial. iv. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless her personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned. 11. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel her bail. September 18, 2025 v.k.updh. BAIL No. 25972 of 2025 3 (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad