HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33786 of 2026 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Heard Sri Kuldeep Johri, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr. S.B.Maurya, learned AGA-I, for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.88 of 2026, under Sections 109(1), 103 and 61(2) BNS, Police Station Puranpur, District Pilibhit during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that it is a case of circumstantial evidence and nobody was named in the FIR but during investigation it was revealed that informant had extra marital affair with one Kuldeep and therefore, she along with Kuldeep committed the murder of the deceased but except bald and verbal allegation, there is no cogent evidence against the applicant on record. 4. He further argued that it is a case of circumstantial evidence and applicant was not having any motive to commit the instant crime and it reflects that merely on the basis of suspicion, he has been made accused in the present matter along with the informant of the case including co- accused Kuldeep. 5. He further argued that as per prosecution when applicant and co- accused Kuldeep were arrested then on their pointing out mobile phone of the deceased was recovered but entire recovery is false and planted one and even alleged recovery was made from an open place which was accessible to all. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kuldeep Johri Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rakesh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 6. He further submits that merely on the basis of above evidence, in the absence of any other corroborative evidence prima facie it cannot be said that applicant was involved in commission of present crime including the informant and co-accused Kuldeep. 7. He further submits that applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 7.3.2026, i.e., for the last more than six months. 8. Per contra, learned AGA although opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 10. It is a case of circumstantial evidence and nobody was named in the FIR. It reflects that during investigation the name of applicant was surfaced and according to the prosecution informant developed illicit relationship with one Kuldeep and she along with him and applicant committed his murder but it reflects that except confessional statement of the applicant and statement of co-accused recorded by Investigating Officer and suspicion and recovery of mobile phone of the deceased on the pointing out of applicant and co-accused Kuldeep, there is no other evidence against the applicant on record. 11. This Court finds merit in the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant that in the absence of any other corroborative evidence merely on the basis of above evidence prima facie it cannot be said that applicant also involved in commission of present crime along with other accused especially considering the fact that recovery of mobile phone of the deceased was made from an open place, which was accessible to all. 12. Further, applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail in since 07.3.2026, i.e., for the 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. BAIL No. 33786 of 2026 2 14. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 15. Let the applicant-Rakesh 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. September 29, 2026 SKM BAIL No. 33786 of 2026 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad