HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33324 of 2026 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Heard Sri Subhash Chandra Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajiv Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 151 of 2026, under Sections 103(1), 238, 190, 191(2), 191(3), 61(2), 140(1) BNS, Police Station Kotwali Hathras, District Hathras, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that however initially FIR of the present case was lodged on 7.4.2026 against the applicant and co- accused Kamal Sharma at police station Sahpau, District Hathras but subsequently when it was found that actually matter relates to Hathras Kotwali then FIR of the present case was transferred to P.S. Hathras Kotwali. 4. He further submitted that admittedly informant of the case was not the eye witness and however during investigation when Investigating Officer recorded the statements of two witness Premlata Sarashwat and Manoj Sharma then they claimed themselves to be the eye-witnesses and stated that applicant and several others who were 16 in numbers abducted the deceased but their statements were recorded after 2 months and even they appear to be the chance witnesses. 5. He further submitted that merely on the basis of statements of the above witnesses, prima facie, it cannot be said that applicant committed the murder of the deceased. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Subhash Chandra Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Gaurav Sharma .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 6. He further submitted that as statements of above witnesses were recorded after two months, therefore, their statements prima facie appears to be doubtful. 7. He further submitted that however applicant is having criminal history of five other cases but his criminal history has been explained and all the case were old one and in one case he has been acquitted and in one another case after investigation no chargesheet was filed against him. 8. He further submitted that in the present matter applicant is in jail since 6.4.2026. 9. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments 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. However it reflects, applicant was named in initial tehreer alongwith co- accused Kamal Sharma but it further reflects, informant of the case was not the eye witness. 12. Record further suggests that Premlata Sarashwat and Manoj Sharma were the two eye-witnesses and they however disclosed the name of the applicant but their statements were recorded after two months and even from their statements they appear to be chance witnesses. Their statements, prima facie, appear to be doubtful. 13. Further, however applicant is having criminal history of five other cases but his criminal history has been explained and all the case were old one and in one case applicant has been acquitted and in one another case after investigation chargesheet has not been filed against him. 14. Further in the present matter applicant is in jail since 6.4.2026. 15. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 16. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 17. Let the applicant-Gaurav Sharma, be released on bail in the aforesaid BAIL No. 33324 of 2026 2 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. 18. 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. 19. 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 18, 2026 Ankita BAIL No. 33324 of 2026 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad