Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:59691 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4277 of 2025 Applicant :- Harpal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dileep Kumar Shukla,Mohit Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anuj Kumar Gupta,Dhirendra Kumar Verma,G.A.,Renu Swarnkar Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Mohit Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anuj Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Jhamman Ram, learned AGA-I for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 418 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 103(1), 352, 351(3) B.N.S., Police Station Mainather, District Moradabad during pendency of the trial. 3. FIR of the present case was lodged on 09.12.2024 against applicant and six others and according to the FIR due to previous enmity on 08.12.2024 at about 8.45 PM in the night applicant and others made assault upon the husband of the informant and co- accused Kulwant gave blow of Gadansha on his head while co- accused Bharat Singh caused firearm injury to him and thereafter other accused persons made assault upon him through wooden stick and Tabal and due to the assault made by them, husband of the informant died. It is further mentioned in the FIR that informant and her son were along with deceased at spot. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, on the basis of false allegation, only due to previous enmity which has been itself admitted by the informant in the FIR, applicant has been made accused in the present matter. 5. He further submits, in the FIR specific role of causing injury to the deceased through Gadansha has been assigned to co-accused Kulwant and specific role of causing firearm injury has been assigned to co-accused Bharat Singh and when the statements of both the eye witnesses were recorded then they however stated that applicant used wooden stick in the incident but no specific role has been assigned to the applicant. 6. He further submits, accused nos. 1 to 6 are real brothers and in the murder of their father deceased was one of the accused and applicant being their relative has been made accused in the present matter on the basis of false allegation along with them as he was one of the witness in the murder case of the father of co-accused persons. 7. He further submits, applicant is a senior citizen and in the present matter he is in jail since December, 2024. 8. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted, applicant has been specifically named in the FIR along with others and incident has been witnessed by two witnesses and they categorically stated that applicant also used wooden stick and therefore,it cannot be said that he has been falsely made accused in the present matter. 9. They further submitted, post mortem report suggests that deceased sustained as many as five injuries and considering the fact that enmity between both sides are admitted and other facts of the case, applicant should not be released on bail. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. Applicant is named in the FIR along with others and as per allegation, he along with other accused persons by making assault committed murder of the husband of the informant due to previous enmity however neither in the FIR nor in the statements of witnesses any specific role of assault has been attributed to the applicant but from the statements of eye witnesses it reflects, he was having wooden stick and he also made assault upon deceased through wooden stick. 12. 12. Further, however, enmity between the both sides are admitted and as per learned counsel for the applicant due to previous enmity, applicant has been made accused in the present matter but enmity is double edge weapon which cuts both sides and in view of this Court at this stage there is no reason to disbelieve the statements of witnesses, who were wife and son of the deceased. 13. Further, from the post mortem report, it reflects, deceased sustained as many as five injuries including firearm injury which was however attributed to co-accused Bharat Singh and post mortem report also suggests that deceased sustained number of lacerated wounds which can also be caused though wooden stick, which as per prosecution, applicant was having. 14. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 15. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is rejected. 16. 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 :- 22.4.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad