Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:31973 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36450 of 2024 Applicant :- Sajid Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Afzal Ansari,Mohd. Khalil Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Mohd. Khalil, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Dharm Raj Pal, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 0387 of 2015, under Sections 302, 326-A, 34 IPC, Police Station- Lisari Gate, District- Meerut, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. FIR of the present case was lodged on 29.05.2015 against applicant and two others and according to FIR, applicant along with two others after entering in the house of the informant threw acid due to which his daughter and number of other family members sustained chemical burns. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that initially FIR of the present case was lodged under Section 326 IPC but after the death of one of the injured Uzama, wife of the applicant, Section 302 IPC has been added. 5. He further submitted that however, as per allegation, applicant was the husband of the deceased Uzama and he along with his family members tortured her and he along with his two associates caused chemical burn injuries to her and her family members but entire allegations levelled against the applicant is totally false. 6. He further submitted that during trial, when injured persons, who were close relatives of the deceased, appeared before the trial court then they did not support the prosecution case and all have been declared hostile. He further submitted that however, informant i.e. father-in-law of the applicant initially in his examination-in-chief supported the prosecution case but during cross-examination, he stated that he did not witness the real incident and did not support the prosecution case in his cross examination. He further submitted that statements of all the witnesses have been annexed along with the affidavit and supplementary affidavit filed in support of the instant bail application. 7. He further submitted that along with applicant co-accused Majid was also made accused with similar allegations and he has been released on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court and his bail order has been annexed at page no. 66 of the paper book and on facts, case of applicant is at par with him. 8. He further submitted that in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 31.05.2015 i.e. for last almost a decade and till date, trial of the case could not be concluded. He further submitted that out of 25 witnesses of the charge sheet, till date only five witnesses could be examined and, therefore, there is no hope of early disposal of the trial. 9. He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history. 10. Per contra, learned AGA however, opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 12. However, as per allegation, applicant, who is son-in-law of the informant, along with others threw acid upon his wife i.e. daughter of the informant due to which she sustained burn injuries and died. 13. Record also suggests that in the incident, five persons also sustained chemical burn injuries but it reflects, all the injured witnesses during trial did not support the prosecution case and they have been declared hostile. Record however, further suggests that during examination-in-chief, informant of the case, supported the prosecution case but in his cross-examination, he also did not support the prosecution case. 14. Further, along with applicant, co-accused Majid was also made accused with similar allegation and he has already been released on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. 15. Further, in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 31.05.2015 i.e. for last almost a decade and till date, trial of the case could not be concluded, therefore, it cannot be said that fundamental right of speedy trial of the applicant has not been violated. 16. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history. 17. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 18. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 19. Let the applicant- Sajid 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 the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 20. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 21. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 5.3.2025 KK Patel Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad