Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:11937 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45396 of 2024 Applicant :- Ajmer Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Pandey,Jainendra Kumar Pandey,Yagya Datt Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shatrughna Yadav, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 257 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 109, 307, 317(2) BNS, Police Station- Karhal, District- Mainpuri, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. FIR of the present case was lodged on 04.07.2024 against applicant and his son and according to FIR, applicant was the neighbour of the sister of the informant and on 04.07.2024 at about 2:10 p.m. in the afternoon, he along with his son made assault upon the sister of the informant and her husband and also caused injury to their grand son and due to assault made by them, husband of sister of the informant died at spot and during treatment sister of the informant also died. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that however, it is a case of double murder but totally on the basis of false and frivolous allegation, applicant has been made accused in the present matter along with his son. He further submitted that admittedly, informant is not an eye-witnesses. 5. He further submitted that however, as per prosecution, in the alleged incident, grand son of the deceased namely Avant also sustained injuries but from his statement recorded during investigation, which has been annexed at page no. 89 of the paper book, it reflects that he also did not witness the incident of assault made upon their grand parents. He further submitted that however, he stated that when he entered in the room then found that his grand parents were lying in injured condition and applicant along with his son was present in the room and thereafter they made assault upon him, therefore, merely on the basis of statement of Avant, it cannot be said that applicant and his son committed the murder of grand parents of the injured Avant and at worst they can only be held liable for causing injury to him. 6. 6. He further submitted that even from perusal of the post-mortem reports, it reflects that both the deceased sustained incised wound and from the statement of grand son of the deceased, it could not be reflected that applicant and his son were having knife and according to him, they made assault upon him from musal(heavy piece of iron) and this fact again suggests that actually applicant and his son did not commit the murder of grand parents of witness Avant. 7. He further submitted that except the statement of Avant, there is no cogent evidence against the applicant on record. 8. He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter, he is in jail since 07.07.2024. 9. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that Avant is the star witness of the prosecution and he is also the injured of the case and in his statement recorded during investigation, he categorically stated that when he entered in the room then found that his grand parents were lying in injured condition and applicant and his son were present there and they also caused injury to him, therefore, his testimony cannot be disbelieved at this stage and applicant fail to explain his presence along with his son in the room of the deceased persons, therefore, considering this fact, the instant bail application should be dismissed. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. However, informant of the case is not the eye-witness of the incident but it is a case of double murder in which two persons lost their lives and their grand son, Avant sustained injuries and from his statement recorded during investigation, however, it reflects that he did not witness the incident of assault made upon his grand parents but according to him, when he entered in the room then his grand parents were lying in injured condition and applicant and his son were present in the room and they were trying to break the lock of box and thereafter they also made assault upon him and due to assault made by them, he sustained injuries and however, from his statement, it reflects that they made assault upon him through heavy piece of iron and from the post-mortem report, it reflects that deceased persons sustained incised wound but merely on the basis of this fact, the statement of witness Avant, cannot be completely disbelieved at this stage. 12. Further, it is a case of double murder and applicant failed to explain his presence along with his son in the room of the deceased persons. 13. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 14. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is rejected. 15. 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 :- 23.1.2025 KK Patel Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad