HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34610 of 2026 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed by the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Narendra Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Satya Prakash Rathor, learned counsel for informant and Dr. S.B. Maurya, learned AGA-I for the State. 3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 70 of 2026, under Sections 103(1), 191(2) BNS, Police Station Mahobkanth, District Mahoba during pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, it is a case of circumstantial evidence and nobody was named in the FIR and when during investigation one Bhupendra @ Tinku was made accused and his statement was recorded then he disclosed the name of applicant. 5. He further submits, apart from the statement of co-accused and confessional statement of applicant before police as per prosecution when applicant was arrested then on his pointing out one wooden stick was recovered but this recovery was made after two months. 6. He further submits, in absence of any other corroborative evidence merely on the basis of above evidence it cannot be said that applicant committed the murder of the deceased. 7. He further submits, however apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of four other cases but his criminal history has been explained and these cases were of minor nature. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Narendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Satya Prakash Rathor Arun Richhariya .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 8. He further submits, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 30.06.2026. 9. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for informant opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. It is a case of circumstantial evidence and nobody was named in the FIR and it reflects, during investigation name of applicant has been surfaced through the statement of co-accused. It further reflects, apart from the statement of co-accused and confessional statement of applicant before police however as per prosecution on the pointing out of applicant one wooden stick was also recovered but it reflects, this recovery was made after two months. This Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for applicant that in absence of any other corroborative evidence merely on the basis of above evidence prima facie it cannot be said that applicant committed the murder of the deceased along with others. 12. Further, however, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of four cases but his criminal history has been explained in the instant bail application and it reflects, these cases were of minor nature. 13. Further, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 30.06.2026 i.e. for last three months and charge-sheet has been filed. 14. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 15. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 16. Let the applicant -Arun Richhariya 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 BAIL No. 34610 of 2026 2 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. 17. 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. 18. 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. September 29, 2026 AK Pandey BAIL No. 34610 of 2026 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad