##PAGE1##

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14279 of 2026

Triveni Pathak

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite

Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Km. Sakshi Patel

Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 67

HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.

1. Heard Km. Sakshi Patel, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rakesh

Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. Instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the

applicant on bail during the trial in in Case Crime No. 290/2025, under

Sections 103(1), 238, 3(5) BNS and 4/25 Arms Act, Police Station

Sujanganj, District Jaunpur.

3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that as per allegation

in the FIR deceased had accompanied the applicant and co-accused

between 6 to 7 p.m. on 23.10.2025. Thereafter body of the deceased was

recovered on 24.10.2025. Thereafter the applicant and co-accused were

arrested and a blood stained knife was recovered on the joint declaration

of the applicant as well as co-accused persons.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that there is no eye witness

of the incident who had seen lastly the deceased in the company of the

applicant even the FIR was lodged after recovery of the dead body and

name of the applicant has been mentioned in the FIR merely on the basis

of apprehension and doubt. It is further submitted that recovery of blood

stained knife, on the basis of joint declaration, is not reliable and not

admissible under Section 23(2) of BSA. Learned counsel for the applicant

further relied upon the judgement of Apex Court in the case of Ananda

Jakkappa Pujari @ Gaddadar vs State of Karnatka, in Criminal

Appeal No.1864 of 2024 wherein Apex Court has observed that recovery

BAIL No. 14279 of 2026

2

on the basis of joint declaration is not admissible as evidence unless

separate article recovered from each accused. It is lastly submitted that

charge sheet has been filed by the police, therefore, there is no

requirement for custodial interrogation. The applicant has no criminal

history and he is languishing in jail since 25.10.2025. In case, he is

granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in

the trial proceedings.

5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for

bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact.

6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions

of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of

offence, evidence, complicity of accused and taking into account

overcrowded jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases before the trial

courts as well as considering the mandate of the judgement of the Apex

Court in the case of Kapil Wadhawan vs Central Bureau of

Investigation reported in 2025 SCC Online SC 3038 as well as guideline

of this Court in the case of Maya Tiwari vs State of U.P. reported in

2024 SCC Online All 6765 regarding grant of bail 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- Triveni Pathak 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

BAIL No. 14279 of 2026

3

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 breac