Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:68250 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10923 of 2025 Applicant :- Jai Narayan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amber Khanna,Raj Kumar Khanna,Ram Kripal,Sandal Khanna Counsel for Opposite Party :- Aman Srivastav,G.A.,Kunwar Abhishek,Shreesh Srivastava Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. None appeared on behalf of informant even in revised call. 2. Heard Sri Raj Kumar Khanna, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Santosh Nigam, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 301 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 IPC, Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act and Section 25/27 Arms Act, Police Station- Junawai, District- Sambhal, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that however, it is a case of double murder and applicant is named in the FIR along with others but he is 75-years old and infirm person and on the basis of false allegation only due to previous enmity, he has been made accused in the present matter along with his family members including his brother. 5. He further submitted that even from the record, it reflects, incident took place in the night and from the statement of eye- witness, Laltesh, it reflects, with regard to murder of Umesh, there is no allegation that applicant caused injury to him and from his statement, it reflects, he attributed the role of causing injury to the deceased Umesh to co-accused Kali Charan and Hariom. 6. He further submitted that as far as another murder is concerned, however, as per allegation, applicant and others opened fire but even from the FIR, it reflects nobody could see the real incident of murder of deceased Pratap and it reflects, after hearing noise, informant and others arrived at spot and witnessed the applicant and others while they were running from the spot and all these facts clearly suggests, there is no cogent evidence against applicant on record that he caused injury to the deceased Pratap. 7. He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter, he is in jail since 01.09.2023 i.e. for last more than one and half years. 8. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that it is a case of double murder and applicant is specifically named in the FIR but could not dispute the fact that as far as murder of deceased Umesh is concerned, as per witness Laltesh, co-accused Kali Charan and Hariom caused fire-arm injury to him. 9. He further could not dispute the fact that as far as murder of another deceased Pratap is concerned, in this regard also it could not be reflected that informant and others could see the real incident. 10. He further could not dispute the fact that from the FIR, it reflects, after hearing noise, informant and others arrived at spot and they could only witness that applicant and others were running from a spot. 11. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is 75 years old and infirm person and he is in jail in the present matter for last more than one and half years. 12. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case. 13. However, as per allegation, due to fire opened by applicant and others, two persons sustained injuries and died but from the statement of witness Laltesh, it reflects co-accused Kali Charan and Hariom caused fire-arm injury to one deceased, namely Umesh. 14. Further, with regard to murder of another deceased, Pratap, however, there is allegation that applicant and others opened fire due to which, he sustained fire-arm injury and died but incident appears to be occurred in the night and applicant is about 75 years' old and infirm person and he is not having any criminal history and in the present matter, he is in jail since 01.09.2023 i.e. for last more than one and half years. 15. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 16. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 17. Let the applicant- Jai Narayan 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. 18. 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. 19. 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 KK Patel Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad