Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:20546 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1703 of 2025 Applicant :- Umesh Chauhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Harish Chandra,Umesh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vinod Kumar Yadav Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Umesh Singh, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Vinod Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the informant and Dr. S. B. Maurya, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 232 of 2024, under Sections 147, 342, 386 & 304 IPC, Police Station Tanda, District Rampur, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. FIR of the present case was lodged on 28.5.2024 against the applicant and six others and according to the FIR on 24.5.2024 on the call of co-accused Riyasat Ali brother of the informant had gone to the restaurant namely Maa Pornima where co-accused Rajesh Kumar, Iqbal, Bhagwan Das, Joginder Singh and Riyasat Ali confined him and badly beaten him through out the night and they also forcibly got executed an agreement and under their pressure, brother of the informant also issued three cheques of Rs. Five lacs in the name of co-accused Rajesh Kumar, Iqbal and Bhagwan Das. 4. It is further mentioned in the FIR that applicant was one of the witness in the above agreement and when brother of the wife of the son of the informant namely Nirmal Singh arrived at spot then found that brother of the informant was lying in injured condition and when he was taken to the hospital then doctor declared him dead. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that on the basis of false allegations, applicant has been roped accused in the present matter alongwith six others and admittedly no one could see the real incident. 6. He further submitted that only allegation against the applicant is that he was one of the witness in the alleged agreement which was forcibly got executed by other named co-accused persons from the deceased. 7. He further submitted that there is absolutely no evidence on record which can suggest that applicant either confined the deceased or caused any injury to him. 8. He further submitted that applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 11.6.2024 i.e. for last more than six months. 9. Per contra, learned AGA as well learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that as the agreement which was executed by the deceased was forcibly got executed by the other accused persons and in the agreement, applicant was one of the witness, therefore, it cannot be said that he is innocent. However, neither AGA nor learned counsel for the informant could dispute the fact that nobody could see the real incident and there is no evidence on record which can suggest that applicant was either present at spot or he caused any injury to the deceased. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. However, as per allegation co-accused Rajesh Kumar, Iqbal, Bhagwan Das, Joginder and Riyasat Ali confined the deceased at the restaurant of co-accused Bhagwan Das and when his brother in law arrived at spot then they ran away from the spot and from the entire evidence on record, it could not be reflected that applicant was either present at spot or he also involved in the confinement of the deceased, however, from the record, it reflects that applicant was one of the witness in the alleged agreement which was forcibly got executed by the co-accused Rajesh Kumar, Iqbal, Bhagwan Das, Joginder and Riyasat Ali and except this, it appears there is no other evidence against the applicant on record. 12. Further, applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 11.6.2024 i.e. for last more than six months. 13. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 14. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 15. Let the applicant-Umesh Chauhan, 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. 16. 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. 17. 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 :- 13.2.2025 Ankita Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad