HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35012 of 2026 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party. 2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 408 of 2024, under Sections 105, 352 B.N.S., Police Station Gauri Bazar, District Deoria during the pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the sister- in-law (Bhabhi) of the deceased and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 24.08.2024, whereas the first information report was lodged by the father-in-law of the applicant on 04.09.2024. Inordinate delay in lodging the first information report is fatal to the prosecution case. There was no enmity between the applicant and the deceased. Further, during the course of trial, the informant- Harilal Prasad was examined as PW-1 and the close relative of the informant namely Ramkaran Prasad was examined as PW-2. Both the aforesaid witnesses have not supported the prosecution case and have been declared hostile by the trial court vide orders dated 25.03.206 and 03.08.2026 respectively. The testimony of the aforesaid prosecution witnesses are collectively annexed as Annexure-4 to the affidavit. It is next contended that the applicant is a law abiding citizen, who cooperated with the police investigation and had joined the trial. The applicant never influenced the witnesses and tampered with the evidence. The trial is moving at a snail's pace and is not likely to conclude early. The applicant is in jail since Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Brijesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sangeeta Devi .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 05.09.2024 having no criminal history and if she is released on bail, she will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that the first information report has been lodged belatedly. During the course of trial, the informant- Harilal Prasad and the close relative of the informant namely Ramkaran Prasad, who were examined as PW-1 and PW-2 respectively, have not supported the prosecution case and have been declared hostile by the trial court vide orders dated 25.03.206 and 03.08.2026 respectively. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for more than two years and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, and no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant- Sangeeta Devi, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that she: (i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and, (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. September 30, 2026 SKT/- BAIL No. 35012 of 2026 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad