Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:90204 Reserved on 22.5.2025 Delivered on 27.5.2025 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32198 of 2024 Applicant :- Anuj Kashyap Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shams Uz Zaman Hon'ble Siddharth,J. Heard Sri Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Shams Uz Zaman, learned counsel for the informant; learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Anuj Kashyap, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 0155 of 2024, under Sections 302, 120-B, 34 IPC, Police Station Baghpat, District- Baghpat, during pendency of trial. Prosecution alleges murder of one, Sonu Gujjar, by three unknown accused. No motive of crime has been assigned to the applicant. As per confessional statement of co-accused, Sonu Gujjar, (deceased is also Sonu Gujjar), has confessed to involvement of applicant in criminal conspiracy to eliminate the deceased. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that except confessional statement of co-accused, Sonu Gujjar and panted recoveries of one 315 bore gun, two live and three empty cartridges, nothing is against the applicant. Recovery is not in accordance with law. Applicant has criminal history of two cases registered against him after this implication and related to this case. He is in jail since 8.5.2025. Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant. They have stated that bail application of co-accused, Sonu Gujjar, was rejected by this Court and has been affirmed by the Apex Court. After hearing the rival contentions, this Court finds that bail application of co-accused aforesaid was rejected by this Court, but it was the accused, Sonu Gujjar, who named the applicant. The Apex Court, while confirming his bail rejection order of Sonu Gujjar, has granted him liberty to apply afresh for bail, if there are changes in circumstances and delay in trial. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid 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 with the following conditions that :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 27.5.2025 Ruchi Agrahari Digitally signed by :- RUCHI AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad