Neutral Citation No.
- 2025:AHC:56898
Court No. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7499 of
2025
Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Maurya
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Shukla,Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Aadesh Kumar Srivastava, Puneet
Kumar Pandey,G.A.
Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
1. Heard Sri G.S. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by
Sri Anurag Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Puneet
Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Santosh
Nigam, learned AGA for the State.
2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 287 of 2024, under Sections
103(1) B.N.S., Police Station Mauaima, District Prayagraj during
pendency of the trial.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, FIR of the present
case was lodged against unknown persons with regard to murder
of the son of the informant but during investigation after about one
month, applicant has been made accused in the present matter.
4. He further submits, on 05.10.2024 when the statement of the
mother of the deceased was recorded then she stated that deceased
had gone along with applicant from his house and when on
06.10.2024 statement of one Bade Lal was recorded then he stated
that he witnessed the applicant along with deceased but as
statements of both these witnesses were recorded after almost a
month, therefore, no reliance can be placed on their statements. He
further submits, except the above evidence there is no other
evidence against the applicant on record.
5. He further submits, however, apart from the present case
applicant is having criminal history of two other cases but his
criminal history has been explained in the instant bail application
and both the cases relate to minor offences. He further submits, in
the present matter applicant is in jail since 10.09.2024 i.e. for last
more than seven months.
6. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the
informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted, however,
nobody was named in the FIR but during investigation complicity
of the applicant was disclosed and there is evidence of last seen
against him but they could not dispute the fact that evidence of last
seen was surfaced after about one month. They further however
submitted that applicant is having criminal history of two other
cases but could not dispute, both the cases relate to minor offences.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record of the case.
8. It is a case of circumstantial evidence and during investigation
after about one month applicant has been made accused in the
present matter through the statements of mother of the deceased
and one Bade Lal and they provided evidence of last seen against
applicant but as their statements were recorded after about one
month, therefore, argument advanced by learned counsel for the
applicant that no reliance can be placed on such statements, cannot
be completely brushed aside at this stage.
9. Further, however, apart from the present case applicant is having
criminal history of two other cases but his criminal history has
been explained in the instant bail application and it appears, both
the cases relate to minor offences.
10. Further, in the present matter applicant is in jail since
10.09.2024 i.e. for last more than seven months.
11. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case
discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on
bail.
12. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of
the case, the instant bail application is allowed.
13. Let the applicant - Ajay Kumar Maurya 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 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.
14. 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.
15. 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.
Order Date :- 17.4.2025
AK Pandey
Digitally signed by :-
ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
