Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:48109 Court No. - 68 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10350 of 2025 Applicant :- Ramveer Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ghan Shyam Das Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J. 1. Learned counsel for the applicants has filed supplementary affidavit. which is taken on record. 2. Heard Shri Anurag Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ghanshyam Das, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Puneet Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record. 3. This bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been moved on behalf of accused-applicants, Ramveer Singh and Anoop @ Babloo, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 211 of 2016, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station Bewar, District Mainpuri. 4. The FIR was lodged on the application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. filed by the first informant. The allegation made in the FIR is that on 24.03.2016, when the ceremony of offering of "Akhat" was going to be done then co-accused reached there with arms and co-accused Pradeep assaulted the son of the informant by rifle while the co-accused Sudheer opened fire, which hit Suneel and injured Vishwa Pratap sustained fire arm injury caused by co- accused Ramveer. The son of the informant was carried by some villagers to the police station Bewar where from he was carried to the District Hospital Mainpuri by a Home Guard namely Sarvesh Kumar where the injured Pawan was medically examined and referred to Agra for better treatment. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused- applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this case crime number and is languishing in jail since 04.03.2025. He has no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that it is a cross case, earlier the applicants had lodged the FIR bearing case Crime No.0095 of 2016, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 34 IPC, P.S. Bewar, District Mainpuri, on 24.03.2016 at 20:30 hours in respect to the incident which took place on the same day. In the said incident, from the side of first informant, 14 persons have been made accused and, thereafter, from the side of first informant, present FIR bearing case Crime No.0211 of 2016, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 IPC, P.S. Bewar, District Mainpuri, was lodged for the same incident on the same day at 22:00 hours, in which from the side of applicants 12 persons have been made accused. He has next submitted that the allegations as alleged in the FIR are vague and absurd and as a result counter blast case has been lodged. It is submitted that the investigating officer has recorded the statement of injured Pavan Pratap @ Pavan, in which he has stated that co-accused Pradeep opened fire on him by his rifle, therefore, he sustained firearm injury. During investigation, investigating officer has recorded second statement of informant on 26.12. 2017 under Section 161 Cr.P.C. wherein the informant stated that co-accused Pradeep was the author of the injuries caused to the injured Pavan Kumar. The second statement of injured Pavan Pratap has been recorded on 24.02.2018, in which he has stated that co-accused Pradeep assaulted him with rifle from about 10 meters distance. It is submitted that the investigating officer has recorded the statement of independent witnesses on 06.06.2016, wherein they have stated that the applicants along with co-accused have been falsely implicated in the present case because neither the applicants and their companion had fire arm weapons nor the son of the informant namely Pavan Pratap Singh has sustained gunshot injury at the place of incident and they were not aware the gunshot injury as sustained the inured Pavan Kumar. As per the statement of injured, the specific role of firing has been assigned to co-accused Pradeep Kumar, while no role has been assigned to the applicant with regard to the gunshot injury as sustained by the injured Pawan Kumar, so there is no credible and cogent evidence against the applicants. Hence, bail has been prayed for. 6. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the first informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts. 7. Considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 9. Let the accused-applicants, Ramveer Singh and Anoop @ Babloo, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on their executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicants will not tamper with the evidence. 2. The applicants will not indulge in any criminal activity. 3. The applicants will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial. 4. The applicants will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless their personal appearance are exempted through counsel by the court concerned. 10. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel their bail. Order Date :- 3.4.2025 v.k.updh. Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad