UPENDRA KUMAR MISHRAversusSTATE OF U.P.

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
          CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6937 of 2025

Upendra Kumar Mishra
                                                                .....Applicant(s)
                                     Versus

State of U.P.
                                                                    .....Opposite
                                                                          Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Samiksha       Chaturvedi, Saurabh
                                Chaturvedi, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Rajesh Kumar Mishra, Vikrant
                                Pandey, Vivek Tiwari

Court No. - 67
           HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.

1. Heard Sri I.K. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Counsel for the applicant, Sri
Vikrant Pandey, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Rakesh Kumar
Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 209 of 2024, under Sections- 302, 392 and
411 IPC, Police Station- Brahmpuri, District- Merut, during the pendency of the
trial.

3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant has been
falsely implicated, though, there is no incriminating material against him. The
applicant is not named in the FIR whereas the allegation has been made against
unknown persons. As per FIR, when the first informant entered in his house, he
was informed that his wife has died at 8.40 a.m. on 21.06.2024 and his licencee
revolver was also in her hand and the almirah was broken and money and
jewellery were also spread on the floor. In his statement, the first informant did
not make any allegation against the applicant or any other person except he
found a motorcycle near his house. Subsequently, on the basis of CCTV
footage it was found that one person, though, having masked, appears to be
similar to the applicant, was going through motorcycle and then took e-
rickshaw to proceed further. The statements of two witnesses, namely, Anil and
Amit have been recorded after one and half months of the incident, who have
stated that they had seen the applicant near the house of the first informant on
his motorcycle. Thereafter some jewellery belonging to the deceased was
                                                                BAIL No. 6937 of 2025
                                   2


shown to be recovered from the applicant. During investigation, it was also
found that though, there was CCTV in the house of the first informant but the
DVR was missing. Such fact was not mentioned in the FIR or in the statement
of the first informant. Counsel for the applicant submitted that there is no eye
witness of the incident. As per postmortem report, the deceased died due to gun
shot injury and she was also having incised wound on her neck. There is no
recovery of any weapon on the pointing out of the applicant. It is submitted that
though in the FIR as well as statements it was mentioned that money and
jewellery were scattered on the floor near the dead body of the deceased.
Subsequently, 3 articles of jewelry were shown to be recovered from the
applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant was seen with mask in
CCTV footage and no one could identify him. Merely on the basis of
identification of shoes, he cannot be implicated. It is lastly submitted that a total
of 39 witnesses are proposed to be examined but till date, only nine witnesses
have been examined. There is no apprehension of tempering with any evidence
and even otherwise the trial will take time to be concluded, as the entire case is
based on circumstantial evidence. It is further submitted that the applicant has
no criminal history. The applicant is a law abiding citizen and he is languishing
in jail since 27.06.2024. In case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the
liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A. has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there are two
witnesses, who had seen the applicant near the house. The first informant went
to his village with the deceased and after completing rituals returned back and
then the witnesses recorded their statements. It is further submitted that though,
the applicant was masked but he appears to be similar to the applicant. The
applicant is not entitled to be released on bail

5. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of
learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the fact that there is no
eye-witness and that the CCTV installed in the house of the deceased, was not
mentioned in the FIR or statement of the first informant and after incident no
witness came forward to identify the applicant, though, two witnesses produced
after one and half months of the incident and keeping in view the nature of
offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and taking into account
overcrowded jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases before the trial courts
                                                             BAIL No. 6937 of 2025
                                  3

as well as considering the mandate of the judgement of the Apex Court in the
case of Shahid Khan Vs. State of Rajasthan, AIR 2016 Supreme Court
1178 and Kapil Wadhawan vs Central Bureau of Investigation reported in
2025 SCC OnLine SC 3038 and without expressing any opinion on the merits
of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on
bail. Accordingly, the present application is allowed.

6. Let the applicant - Upendra Kumar Mishra involved in the aforementioned
crime be released on bail, on his 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 not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper
with the evidence.

ii. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely without
seeking any adjournment.

iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of
any crime after being released on bail.

iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond
executed by him.

7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.

8. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified
by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

9. Verification of mobile number and Aadhar card of the applicant
as well as sureties should be verified by the court concerned.

10. It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of computer
generated copy of this order, downloaded from the official website of High
Court Allahabad and verified by the concerned counsel with the undertaking
that the certified copy will be filed within 15 days.
                                                                                                 BAIL No. 6937 of 2025
                                                                      4


                                    11. It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release order to the
                                    concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to ensure early
                                    release of the applicant.

                                    12. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through
                                    concerned Jail Superintendent via e-mail or e-prison portal in compliance of the
                                    order of the Apex Court in the case of Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In
                                    Re: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No.4 of 2021 decided on 31.01.2023
                                    reported in (2024) 10 SCC 685.



                                                                                 (Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)
                                    April 20, 2026
                                    gp




Digitally signed by :-
GANESH PRAKASH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad