HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32408 of 2026 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard counsel for the applicant and Sri Manoj Gautam, learned AGA for the State-opposite party. Perused the material available on record. 2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 275 of 2026, under Section 105 B.N.S., Police Station- Anoopshahar, District- Bulandshahr, during the pendency of the trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 23.06.2026, whereas the first information report was lodged on 29.06.2026. The inordinate delay in lodging the first information report is fatal to the prosecution case. As per the statement of the eyewitness, namely, Shishpal (the diver), the applicant and the wife of the informant entered the deep waters and started drowning. The applicant was somehow rescued, whereas the wife of the informant could not be saved and subsequently died. It is contended that there was no prior enmity between the parties. The incident is purely accidental in nature.The applicant neither had the requisite knowledge nor any intention for committing the offence. The case of the applicant is distinguishable from that of other co-accused. The applicant is in jail since 13.07.2026 having no criminal history and in case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned AGA for the State has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rahul Singh Dahiya Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Amit Kumar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 5. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that the first information report has been lodged belatedly. No prior enmity existed between the parties. At this stage, there is no credible evidence to establish that the applicant had the requisite knowledge or intention to cause the death. Moreover, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and has remained confined for almost two months and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when 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, 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 Amit Kumar, involved in the aforesaid case 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 subject to the conditions that he: (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 11, 2026 Abhishek BAIL No. 32408 of 2026 2 (Vivek Varma, J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad