HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10829 of 2023 Court No. - 87 HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the Sate and perused the record. 2. This is the second bail application moved on behalf of accused-applicant, Atul @ Tinku. First bail application has been rejected by Hon.Deepak Verma,J. vide order dated 20.02.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.5083 of 2021. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that accused-applicant has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive and he has not committed any offence against the informant. He further submits that charge-sheet has already been filed in this case on 13.04.201. Learned counsel further submits that similarly situated co-accused namely, Anoor alias Pankaj and Amit Kumar, have already been enlarged on bail by co- ordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated 14.12.2020 and 15.03.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 44257 of 2020 and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.11955 of 2021 respectively, copies of which have been annexed as page no.38 and 44 of the bail application. He further submitted that the F.I.R. has been registered under Sections 307, 379 I.P.C., but on the basis of incident of loot and recovery etc, the chargesheet was filed under Sections 394, 411 I.P.C. He is languishing in jail since 06.10.2020. 4. Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that accused-applicant is named in Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Bipin, Kunwar Abhishek, Mehdi Abbas, Ram Krishna Mishra, Som Veer, Vibhav Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ankit Agarval, G.A. Atul @ Tinku .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) the FIR along with one unknown co-accused person. He further submitted that the huge quantity of looted ornaments was recovered from the possession of accused-applicant Atul @ Tinku. It is further submitted that injured sustained grievous injury. The accused-applicant has committed marpeet with the injured. He further submitted that trial proceeding is going on. The cross examination of the complainant PW-1 has not been completed as yet. There is no any mala fide intention or motive to falsely implicate the accused applicant in this case and the accused applicant is in relationship to the informant. Statement of Meena Bansal injured (now deceased) was recorded during the course of investigation by the IO. She corroborated the prosecution version and it may give effect within the purview of dying declaration. He further submitted that accused applicant is having two more cases. 5. From perusal of the record, it appears that accused-applicant is the son of brother-in-law (late Sudesh Kumar Singhal) of the informant. He along with other two co-accused persons entered in the house of the victim and demanded keys to her and when she refused, they started marpeet by hard blunt object and snatched keys. She became conscious. As per medical report, multiple fractures were found on the body of the injured. Huge quantity of looted ornaments was recovered from the possession of applicant. 6. Considering all the facts and circumstances, role and involvement, nature of injuries sustained by the injured person, progress of trial and role of the accused person, the bail application of the applicant is, accordingly, rejected. 7. However, trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the aforesaid case. September 19, 2025 A.N. Mishra BAIL No. 10829 of 2023 2 (Santosh Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- AMARNATH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad