Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:3330 Court No. - 5 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27525 of 2024 Applicant :- Rihan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Prakash Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J. Matter is taken up in revised call. By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 41 of 2024 at Police Station Kapoorpur, District Hapur, under Sections 302, 394, 411, 328, 34 I.P.C. and Section 21/22 of N.D.P.S. Act. The applicant is in jail since 11.03.2024. The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 02.07.2024. The following arguments made by Shri Chandra Prakash Pandey, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned A.G.A.-I from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail: 1. Briefly, the prosecution case set out in the F.I.R. is that the deceased left his house. The deceased was an E- rickshaw driver who left his house for work in the afternoon on 04.03.2024. He did not return home that night and his phone was switched off. The family members went out in search of the deceased but to no avail. Consequently, first informant dialed the emergency police number 112 and informed them about the disappearance of the deceased. On 05.03.2024, at about 10:00 am, the informant was intimated by the neighbors that the body of the deceased was lying near in kaccha road in front of Sunaro Wale Bagh. The F.I.R. was lodged on 10.03.2024. 2. The delay in lodgement of the F.I.R. is fatal to the prosecution case. 3. The applicant was not named in the F.I.R. 4. The applicant was nominated in the statement of the first informant made before the police authorities. The said statement is unreliable for various reasons. There was no cause for the failure of the first informant to promptly inform the police authorities about the complicity of the applicant in the offence. The applicant was nominated at the instigation of inimical parties. 5. The applicant was nominated solely on the basis of suspicion. Suspicion howsoever grave, is no substitute for evidence. 6. There is no direct evidence against the applicant. 7. One E-rickshaw was planted on the applicant to burnish the credentials of the police authorities. 8. There is no independent witness to the recovery. 9. The recovered article cannot be connected with the offence. 10. Chain of incriminating circumstances against the applicant is not complete. 11. The applicant has explained his criminal history. It is also contended that the applicant has become a soft target and a convenient scapegoat for the police authorities who nominated him in a number of false cases to burnish their professional credentials. The said cases do not have any bearing on the instant bail application. 12. The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to join the trial proceedings. There is no possibility of her influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending. In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant- Rihan be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial. (ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. The learned trial court is directed to fix the sureties after due application of mind in light of the judgement passed by this Court in Arvind Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. (Application U/S 482 No.2613 of 2023). The learned trial court shall ensure that the right of bail of the applicant granted by this Court is not frustrated by arbitrary demands of sureties, or onerous conditions which are unrelated to the socioeconomic status of the applicant. Order Date :- 7.1.2025 Jaswant Digitally signed by :- JASWANT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad