HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30716 of 2025 Court No. - 66 HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J. Heard Sri P. P. Rao, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Ajay Singh, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 99 of 2025, under Sections 140(2), 103(1) & 238(a) of B.N.S., Police Station Khajani, District Gorakhpur, during pendency of trial. There are allegations against the applicant that the deceased husband of the informant used to work in the company along with the co-accused and he went missing on 12.10.2025. Missing report was lodged on 15.10.2025 and an unknown dead body was recovered on 25.10.2025 which was identified by the informant as body of her husband. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant is named in the F.I.R. in question and he has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of planted recovery of Rs. 100. It is further submitted that one of the co-accused Aniket Yadav has been granted bail by the Court vide order dated 07.08.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 26319 of 2025, therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 19.03.2025. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Prashant Pratap Rao, Rajiv Chowdhury Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Kishan Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) liberty of bail. 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, Kishan Yadav, 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, BAIL No. 30716 of 2025 2 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. September 17, 2025 pks BAIL No. 30716 of 2025 3 (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- PAWAN KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad