HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32339 of 2026 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Sri Shadab Alam, learned Advocate filed his power on behalf of informant, today in the Court, which is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri S.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shadab Alam, learned counsel for informant and Sri Shatruhan Yadav, learned AGA for the State. 3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 217 of 2026, under Sections 87, 103(1), 238(b), 61(2) BNS, Police Station Mehnagar, District Azamgarh during pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, FIR of the present case was lodged against the son of applicant under Section 87 BNS but after the recovery of dead body of the deceased i.e. daughter of the informant case has been converted under Section 103(1) BNS. 5. He further submits, during investigation through the statement of co- accused Manoj Yadav i.e. son of the applicant, applicant has been made accused in the present matter. 6. He further submits, except the statement of co-accused and confessional statement of applicant before police there is no cogent and admissible evidence against the applicant on record. He further submits, as applicant is father of the named accused Manoj Yadav, therefore, police during investigation also implicated him. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shravan Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ramadhar Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 7. He further submits, it is a case of circumstantial evidence and prima facie there is no cogent evidence against the applicant on record. 8. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 24.06.2026. 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 applicant was not named in the FIR and FIR of the present case was lodged against his son i.e. co-accused Manoj Yadav. 12. Record further suggests that during investigation through the statement of co-accused Manoj Yadav recorded by the Investigating Officer applicant has been made accused in the present matter. 13. Further, it reflects, except the statement of applicant and co-accused before police there is no cogent evidence against the applicant on record. 14. Considering the fact that applicant is father of the named co-accused Manoj Yadav, who appears to be prime accused, the reason of his false implication disclosed by learned counsel for applicant during the course of argument cannot be ruled out at this stage. 15. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 24.06.2026. 16. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 17. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 18. Let the applicant - Ramadhar Yadav 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 BAIL No. 32339 of 2026 2 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. 19. 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. 20. 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 AK Pandey BAIL No. 32339 of 2026 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad