Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:68346 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5871 of 2025 Applicant :- Atar Singh Urf Juju Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Birendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Dinesh Kumar Maurya,G.A.,Ram Raj Prajapati Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Shri Birendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Shatrughan Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent and Shri Ram Raj Prajapati, learned counsel for the informant. 3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.257 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 3(5), 352, 351(3) B.N.S., Police Station Kurara, District Hamirpur, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 4. FIR of the present case was lodged on 12.08.2024 against applicant and his two sons and according to the F.I.R., on 12.08.2024 when younger brother of the informant was in the field then applicant alongwith his two sons beaten him and thereafter accused persons took him in their vehicle and again made assault upon him at crossing through wooden sticks and when wife and daughter of the injured tried to save him then they managed to escape from the spot after abusing and threatening them. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that however, applicant is named in the FIR but entire allegation of assault made in the FIR is totally false. 6. He further submits that from perusal of the FIR, it reflects, however, informant claimed himself to be eye-witness but even from the FIR, it reflects, he was not the eye-witness. He further submits, when his statement was recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. then he although reiterated the version of the FIR but he also stated that what information he received, he informed and this fact again suggests that actually he was not the eye-witness. 7. He further submits, as per prosecution, wife and daughter of the deceased arrived at spot and witnessed the incident and from their statements recorded during investigation, it reflects, although they also stated that applicant also made assault upon the deceased alongwith his sons but from their statements, it reflects, that sons of the applicant were having wooden sticks and applicant was making assault through kicks and fists. He further submits, from their statements, it also reflects that on the exhortation of the applicant, his sons made assault and therefore, it reflects, sons of the applicant were the principal accused and only being father of the principal accused, applicant has been made accused in the present matter due to previous enmity, which has been admitted by the prosecution. 8. He further submits that applicant is not having any previous criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 14.08.2024 i.e. for last more than eight months. 9. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submit that deceased sustained as many as nine injuries and as per all the witnesses, applicant also actively participated in the incident but they could not dispute the fact that as per the statements of wife and daughter of the deceased, who were eye-witnesses, applicant was not having any weapon and he made assault through kicks and fists and according to them, he was making exhortation. 10. They further could not dispute the fact that as per the statements of above eye-witnesses, sons of the applicant were having wooden sticks. 11. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record of the case. 12. However, as per allegation, applicant and his two sons made assault due to which deceased died and post-mortem report also suggests that he sustained as many as nine injuries including several lacerated wounds but from the statements of the wife and daughter of the deceased, who were eye-witnesses, it reflects, no weapon has been assigned to the applicant whereas wooden sticks have been assigned to the sons of the applicant i.e. co-accused and according to these witnesses, applicant was using kicks and fists and considering this fact coupled with the fact that applicant is the father of two other co-accused, who appear to be principal accused, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant with regard to his false implication, cannot be completely ruled out at this stage. 13. Further, applicant is not having any previous criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 14.08.2024 i.e. for last more than eight months. 14. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 15. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 16. Let the applicant- Atar Singh Urf Juju, 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. 17. 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. 18. 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 :- 30.4.2025 Zafar Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad