Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:20709 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1671 of 2025 Applicant :- Sonu Kashyap Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vipin Gangwar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,V.P. Singh Kashyap Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Vipin Gangwar, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri V.P. Singh Kashyap, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Rajiv Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 422 of 2024, under Sections 103(1)/238(A) BNS, Police Station Subhash Nagar, District Bareilly, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. FIR of the present case was lodged on 14.8.2024 against the applicant and according to the FIR on 14.8.2024, applicant committed the murder of the son of the informant by strangulation. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that it is a case of circumstantial evidence and only cogent evidence against him is the evidence of last seen. 5. He further submitted that however, during investigation Investigating Officer procured a footage of CCTV, details of which have been annexed at page-70 of the paper book and from its perusal, however, it reflects, applicant was alongwith the deceased on 14.8.2024 at 21:24:11 hours and on 14.8.2024 at 21:28:36 hours deceased was going behind the applicant towards the place of incident and thereafter applicant was seeing coming from the place of incident at 21:35:21 hours but merely on the basis of such evidence, at this stage, it cannot be said that applicant committed the murder of the deceased as according to the post mortem report which was conducted on 17.8.2024 at 11:30 pm, deceased might have been died on 13.8.24 in the after noon. He next submits, considering the such long gap between evidence of last seen and probable time of death of the deceased, it is not safe to say that applicant committed the instant offence. 6. He further submitted that applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 19.8.2024 i.e. for last almost six months. 7. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that as on 14.8.2024 at about 9:25 pm in the late night, applicant was witnessed alongwith the deceased and when he was arrested then he confessed his guilt and on his pointing out, nivad (a type of cloth) was also recovered which was used in the commission of the alleged crime, therefore, it cannot be said that there is no evidence against the applicant on record and therefore, the instant bail application should be dismissed. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 9. It is a case of circumstantial evidence and as per prosecution through CCTV footage, applicant was last seen alongwith the deceased but considering the details of the CCTV footage and post mortem report of the deceased, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that merely on the basis of such evidence of last seen, it is not safe to say that applicant committed the murder of the deceased, cannot be ruled out, at this stage. 10. Further, however, apart from the evidence of last seen as per prosecution when applicant was arrested then he confessed his guilt and piece of nivad (a type of cloth) which was used in the crime was also recovered but merely on the basis of such evidences, it cannot be said applicant is the person who committed the alleged crime. 11. Further, except the above two evidences, 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 19.8.2024 i.e. for last almost 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-Sonu Kashyap, 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