HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27646 of 2026 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard Sri Kamal Krishna, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Vipin Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party, and Sri Sadashiv Tripathi, Advocate holding brief of Sri Vinod Kumar, learned counsel for the informant. 2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 186 of 2026, under Section 105 B.N.S., Police Station Hathras Junction, District Hathras during the pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is not a doctor nor has performed any medical procedure nor administered or provided any medicine to the mother of the deceased. As per the postmortem report, no external injury was seen on the body of the deceased. According to the postmortem report, the cause of death could not be ascertained. Viscera was preserved and sent for chemical analysis. As per the viscera report dated 05.07.2026, annexed as Annexure-1 to the affidavit of compliance, no chemical poison was found. The medical report does not support the prosecution version. At this stage there is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The applicant is in jail since 05.01.2026 having no criminal history and if he is released on bail, he 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. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jai Kishan, Vipin Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Vinod Kumar, G.A. Ashok Kumar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that the medical report does not support the prosecution version. At this stage there is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for more than eight months 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- Ashok 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 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 24, 2026 SKT/- BAIL No. 27646 of 2026 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad