Manish Vs State of U.P.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6969 of 2025

Manish

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s)

¶7

Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Amit Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 51

¶8

HON'BLE RAJ BEER SINGH, J.

¶9

Second supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicant-accused and learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶11

The present second bail application has been filed by the applicantaccused involved in Case Crime No.438 of 2022, under Sections 302, 201 IPC, P.S. Khatauli, District Muzaffar Nagar with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶12

According to prosecution version, on 29.08.2022 the son of informant, namely, Anuj has gone missing and he was last seen with applicant and coaccused Suhail and Kale. The informant has lodged missing report on 29.08.2022 mentioning the above stated facts. Thereafter, dead-body of deceased was also found in sugarcane field near Atarpura and the first information report was lodged on 31.08.2022 against applicant and four coaccused persons, alleging that they have taken the deceased with them and thereafter, committed his murder.

¶13

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. There is no eyewitness of the alleged incident and that the case of prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. After disappearance of deceased, initially a missing report was lodged but applicant was not named in that report. It was stated that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case merely on the basis of suspicion that deceased was having some relation with his sister. After

¶14

BAIL No. 6969 of 2025

¶15

2

¶16

rejection of first bail application of applicant, material witnesses have been examined before the trial Court and thus there is no possibility of tampering with evidence. Applicant has no criminal history and he is in jail since 01.09.2022 and thus he has already undergone detention of three years. It was stated that five witnesses have been examined and in the charge-sheet 20 witnesses have been cited as prosecution witness and thus trial of the case is likely to take sufficient long time. Lastly, it was submitted that in case applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶17

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is evidence that deceased was 'last seen' with applicant and that first bail application of applicant has already been rejected.

¶18

Considering submissions of learned counsel for the parties and all attending facts, particularly period of detention and stage of trial, without expressing any opinion on the merits, a case for bail is made out.

¶19

The bail application is allowed .

¶20

Let the applicant - Manish involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing each a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶21

i. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶22

ii. The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate any of the prosecution witness.

¶23

iii. The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶24

iv. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶25

v. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶26

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the Court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel bail of applicant in accordance with law.

¶27

October 15, 2025 'SP'/-

¶28

(Raj Beer Singh,J.)

¶29

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Manish v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manish v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases