Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:31294 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7542 of 2025 Applicant :- Sohrab Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vijai Shanker Tripathi,Vinod Shankar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Ms. Pooja Singh Advocate, holding brief of Sri Vinod Shankar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.546 of 2023, under Sections 302, 506 IPC, Police Station-Katghar, District-Moradabad, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. FIR of the present case was lodged on 01.11.2023 against applicant and co-accused Salman and one unknown person and according to the FIR on 31.10.2023 at about 10.00 P.M. in the night applicant along with other accused after taking the son of the informant from his house committed his murder by causing fire- arm injury to him. 4. It is further mentioned in the FIR that when after hearing noises informant came out from his house then witnessed that applicant and co-accused Salman were dragging his son and when he raised alarm then they ran away from the motorcycle. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, on the basis of false allegation, applicant has been made accused in the present matter. 6. She further submits, during investigation however informant and other eye-witnesses supported the prosecution case and reiterated the version of the FIR but during trial they did not support the prosecution case and they have been declared hostile and their statements have been annexed along with the instant bail application. 7. She further submits, as all the eye witnesses have been turned hostile therefore no evidence is left against the applicant and his chance of conviction in the present matter is quite remote. 8. She next submits, however, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of three other cases but his criminal history has been explained in the instant bail application and out of three cases one case is of the year 2009 and however remaining two cases were of the year 2023 but both these cases relates to the present matter. 9. She further submits, when applicant was arrested in the present matter then police implicated him in a case under section 307 IPC and thereafter he has also been made accused under the provisions of U.P. Gangster Act. 10. She next submits, in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 02.11.2023 i.e. for last more than a year. 11. 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. 12. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 13. However, as per allegation made in the FIR, applicant along with others committed the murder of the son of the informant by causing fire-arm injuries to him and from the record, it reflects that incident was witnessed by informant and other witnesses and they also supported the version of the FIR during investigation but record also suggest when they appeared before the trial court then they did not support the prosecution case and they have been declared hostile. 14. Further, however, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of three other cases but his criminal history has been explained in the instant bail application and it reflects out of three cases, two cases relates to the present matter and it appears when applicant was arrested in the present matter then he was also made accused for offence under section 307 IPC by the police and thereafter on the basis of present case he has also been made accused under the provisions of U.P. Gangster Act. Further the remaining case is of the year 2009. 15. Further, in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 02.11.2023 i.e. for last more than a year. 16. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 17. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 18. Let the applicant- Sohrab 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. 19. 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. 20. 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 Neeraj Digitally signed by :- NEERAJ KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad