High Court · 2025

10. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the site indicates that the persons from the informant's side had themselves attacked the applicant's house and they were the aggressors. He has further submitted that the co-accused Ashraf and Sageer had suffered injuries in the incident as is evident from their medico legal examination report prepared on

04.03.2025.

11. The learned counsel for the applicant states that the injuries of the two co-accused persons recorded at the time of their medico legal examination conducted while their arrest, remained unexplained, which shows that the prosecution has not come up with complete facts. It has also been submitted on behalf of the applicant that the co-accused Asraf has already been granted bail by this court by means of an order dated

09.05.2025, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.4024 of 2025.

12. The learned A.G.A. as well as the learned counsel for the informant have opposed the bail application and they have submitted that four persons have received injuries in the incident and one person has lost his life. The offence is heinous in nature, the investigation is still pending and, therefore, the applicant should not be released on bail at this stage.

13. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that admittedly there is an animosity between the parties and prior to lodging of the F.I.R. in question, another F.I.R. was lodged from the applicant's side on on 01.03.2025 at 11.59 Hrs. stating that persons from the informant's side had attacked the applicant's house and had injured the applicant's wife and his brother; the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the alleged victims were themselves the aggressors and they had attacked the persons from the applicant's side being aggrieved from lodging of F.I.R. from the applicant's side and this submission finds support from a perusal of the site plan which indicates that the incident had occurred in front of the applicant's house; that although the F.I.R. assigns the specific roles to numerous co- accused persons, no specific role has been assigned to the applicant either in the F.I.R. or in the statement of the informant; that one of the injured person Sonu has stated that ten persons including the applicant had assaulted the deceased Israil with kudal, lathi, farsa, bricks and stones but he has specifically stated that Sageer and Shakeela had caught hold of hands of the deceased and Banney had stabbed him; that although the investigation is said to be still pending, statements of all the injured persons have already been brought on record and the same have been annexed with the bail application and therefore, in spite of the fact that the investigation is still pending and the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 25.03.2025 and co- accused Asraf has already been granted bail by this court and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime.

14. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed.

15. Let the applicant-Abrar 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 magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court. (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) Order Date :- 12.5.2025 Ram. RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

10. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the site indicates that the persons from the informant's side had themselves attacked the applicant's house and they were the aggressors. He has further submitted that the co-accused Ashraf and Sageer had suffered injuries in the incident as is evident from their medico legal examination report prepared on

04.03.2025.

11. The learned counsel for the applicant states that the injuries of the two co-accused persons recorded at the time of their medico legal examination conducted while their arrest, remained unexplained, which shows that the prosecution has not come up with complete facts. It has also been submitted on behalf of the applicant that the co-accused Asraf has already been granted bail by this court by means of an order dated

09.05.2025, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.4024 of 2025.

12. The learned A.G.A. as well as the learned counsel for the informant have opposed the bail application and they have submitted that four persons have received injuries in the incident and one person has lost his life. The offence is heinous in nature, the investigation is still pending and, therefore, the applicant should not be released on bail at this stage.

13. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that admittedly there is an animosity between the parties and prior to lodging of the F.I.R. in question, another F.I.R. was lodged from the applicant's side on on 01.03.2025 at 11.59 Hrs. stating that persons from the informant's side had attacked the applicant's house and had injured the applicant's wife and his brother; the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the alleged victims were themselves the aggressors and they had attacked the persons from the applicant's side being aggrieved from lodging of F.I.R. from the applicant's side and this submission finds support from a perusal of the site plan which indicates that the incident had occurred in front of the applicant's house; that although the F.I.R. assigns the specific roles to numerous co- accused persons, no specific role has been assigned to the applicant either in the F.I.R. or in the statement of the informant; that one of the injured person Sonu has stated that ten persons including the applicant had assaulted the deceased Israil with kudal, lathi, farsa, bricks and stones but he has specifically stated that Sageer and Shakeela had caught hold of hands of the deceased and Banney had stabbed him; that although the investigation is said to be still pending, statements of all the injured persons have already been brought on record and the same have been annexed with the bail application and therefore, in spite of the fact that the investigation is still pending and the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 25.03.2025 and co- accused Asraf has already been granted bail by this court and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime.

14. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed.

15. Let the applicant-Abrar 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 magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court. (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) Order Date :- 12.5.2025 Ram. RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench