Allahabad High Court

1. Short counter affidavit by Sri Sameer Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant today in the Court, is taken on record.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

3. The prosecution story in brief is that informant's brother was murdered last year by accused Aabad, Aurangzeb (applicants) and others as such, the case is going on before the trial Court on account of which, the aforesaid persons were making pressure to settle the matter failing which, they threatened him and his family members with regard to said threatening, a case was also registered at Police Station Civil Lines. On 12.05.2024 at about 04:30 P.M. the informant's paternal uncle Rihan and Afsar were coming to their house on the way, accused-applicants Aurangzeb, Aabad, accused Zishan, Arbaz and Shahnawaz stopped them and committed maarpeet with them, who were armed with lathi, danda, knife and country made pistol and to kill them firing was also made, who somehow managed to escape but the accused persons entered into the house and accused-applicant Auranzeb has assaulted upon Rihan and Saiba with knife due to which they became injured, whereas accused- applicant Aabad with baat of the pistol upon the head and the remaining accused has assaulted with lathi and danda upon alarm, the accused persons ran away.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants are innocent and the have been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the applicants has drawn attention of this Court to the statement of Rihan, copy of which is at page no. 47 of the paper book, and argued that general role has been assigned to all the accused persons, however role of firing has been assigned to accused Zishan. Apart from the statement of Rihan, learned counsel has also drawn attention of this Court to the statement of injured Saiba, copy of which is at page no. 37 of 2 BAIL No. 30351 of 2025 the paper book and argued that she has also assigned general role to all the accused applicants. Learned counsel further argued that according to the F.I.R. version the role assigned to the applicant-Aurangzeb is that he stabbed the injured Rihan and Saiba with knife. He further drawn attention of this Court to the injury report of the injured Rihan and Saiba and argued that the injured Rihan has sustained as many as five injuries but perusal of the same would go to show that there is no injury caused by knife and so far as injured Saiba is concerned, she has sustained only one injury which is a multiple scratch mark and as per the opinion of the doctor injuries caused by hard and blunt object. Learned counsel thus argued that general role has been assigned to all the accused persons including the applicants and on account of pending litigation under Section 302 I.P.C., the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicants have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicants that they are ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make themselves available before the court whenever required and are also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon them. He next submits that applicants are in jail since 07.08.2025.

5. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that in case the applicants are released on bail they will misuse the liberty of bail. Learned counsel for the informant has drawn attention of this Court to the statement of doctor and argued that the doctor has specifically stated that the injuries were caused by sharp edged weapon and since the applicants have been assigned the role of stabbing, therefore the applicants are not entitled for bail.

6. In reply to the submissions of learned counsel for the informant, learned counsel for the applicants argued that the injured is alleged to have sustained injury by stabbing but the injured has assigned general role in their statements. Furthermore, taking into account the statement of the doctor, the same cannot be taken into account after perusing the injury report and even if it is taken to be true for the same of argument, there is a benefit of doubt, which has to go in favour of the applicants thus the applicants are entitled for bail.

7. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence and without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

8. Let the applicants Aurangjeb and Aabad, be released on bail in Case Crime No. 179 of 2024 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 452, 504, 3 BAIL No. 30351 of 2025 506, 307 I.P.C., Police Station Partapur, District Meerut, on executing a personal bond and furnishing two local sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions: i) The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicants shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicants shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court. iv) The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicants are accused, or suspected of the commission. v) The applicants 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

9. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant in accordance with law. September 8, 2025 S.Ali (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)

1. Short counter affidavit by Sri Sameer Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant today in the Court, is taken on record.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

3. The prosecution story in brief is that informant's brother was murdered last year by accused Aabad, Aurangzeb (applicants) and others as such, the case is going on before the trial Court on account of which, the aforesaid persons were making pressure to settle the matter failing which, they threatened him and his family members with regard to said threatening, a case was also registered at Police Station Civil Lines. On 12.05.2024 at about 04:30 P.M. the informant's paternal uncle Rihan and Afsar were coming to their house on the way, accused-applicants Aurangzeb, Aabad, accused Zishan, Arbaz and Shahnawaz stopped them and committed maarpeet with them, who were armed with lathi, danda, knife and country made pistol and to kill them firing was also made, who somehow managed to escape but the accused persons entered into the house and accused-applicant Auranzeb has assaulted upon Rihan and Saiba with knife due to which they became injured, whereas accused- applicant Aabad with baat of the pistol upon the head and the remaining accused has assaulted with lathi and danda upon alarm, the accused persons ran away.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants are innocent and the have been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the applicants has drawn attention of this Court to the statement of Rihan, copy of which is at page no. 47 of the paper book, and argued that general role has been assigned to all the accused persons, however role of firing has been assigned to accused Zishan. Apart from the statement of Rihan, learned counsel has also drawn attention of this Court to the statement of injured Saiba, copy of which is at page no. 37 of 2 BAIL No. 30351 of 2025 the paper book and argued that she has also assigned general role to all the accused applicants. Learned counsel further argued that according to the F.I.R. version the role assigned to the applicant-Aurangzeb is that he stabbed the injured Rihan and Saiba with knife. He further drawn attention of this Court to the injury report of the injured Rihan and Saiba and argued that the injured Rihan has sustained as many as five injuries but perusal of the same would go to show that there is no injury caused by knife and so far as injured Saiba is concerned, she has sustained only one injury which is a multiple scratch mark and as per the opinion of the doctor injuries caused by hard and blunt object. Learned counsel thus argued that general role has been assigned to all the accused persons including the applicants and on account of pending litigation under Section 302 I.P.C., the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicants have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicants that they are ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make themselves available before the court whenever required and are also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon them. He next submits that applicants are in jail since 07.08.2025.

5. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that in case the applicants are released on bail they will misuse the liberty of bail. Learned counsel for the informant has drawn attention of this Court to the statement of doctor and argued that the doctor has specifically stated that the injuries were caused by sharp edged weapon and since the applicants have been assigned the role of stabbing, therefore the applicants are not entitled for bail.

6. In reply to the submissions of learned counsel for the informant, learned counsel for the applicants argued that the injured is alleged to have sustained injury by stabbing but the injured has assigned general role in their statements. Furthermore, taking into account the statement of the doctor, the same cannot be taken into account after perusing the injury report and even if it is taken to be true for the same of argument, there is a benefit of doubt, which has to go in favour of the applicants thus the applicants are entitled for bail.

7. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence and without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

8. Let the applicants Aurangjeb and Aabad, be released on bail in Case Crime No. 179 of 2024 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 452, 504, 3 BAIL No. 30351 of 2025 506, 307 I.P.C., Police Station Partapur, District Meerut, on executing a personal bond and furnishing two local sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions: i) The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicants shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicants shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court. iv) The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicants are accused, or suspected of the commission. v) The applicants 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

9. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant in accordance with law. September 8, 2025 S.Ali (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)