Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:55217 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12115 of 2025 Applicant :- Chandranath And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Sri Anil Kumar Pandey, learned Advocate, submits that Sri Vijay Kumar Mishra is the counsel for the informant of the case but his name has not been shown in the cause list. However, he is ready to assist the Court. 2. Heard Sri Vivek Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Anil Kumar Pandey, learned Advocate, holding brief of Sri Vijay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Vijay Kumar, learned AGA-I for the State. 3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicants on bail in Case Crime No. 103 of 2024, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 323, 504, 506, 325 and 427 IPC, Police Station Barsathi, District Jaunpur during pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits, on the basis of general and omnibus allegations, applicants have been made accused in the present matter along with eleven others including co-accused Manoj Kumar Yadav and Jay Kumar Yadav and after considering the entire facts of the case in detail co-accused Manoj Kumar Yadav and Jay Kumar Yadav have already been released on bail by this Court and their bail orders have been annexed at pages 145 and 149 of the paper-book respectively and as far as allegations of assault is concerned, the case of applicants is exactly at par with them. 5. He further submits, however, as per prosecution when applicants along with others including co-accused Manoj Kumar Yadav and Jay Kumar Yadav was arrested then on his pointing out four wooden sticks and two iron rods were recovered, which was alleged to have been used in the crime but entire recovery is false and planted one. 6. He further submits, alleged recovered items were common tools and can be very easily planted and merely on the basis of such recovery, it cannot be said that applicants participated in the alleged crime and their case is distinguishable from the case of co- accused Manoj Kumar Yadav and Jay Kumar Yadav. 7. He further submits, applicants are not having any criminal history and in the present matter they are in jail since 08.05.2024 i.e. for last more than ten months. 8. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicants and others made assault and due to the assault made by them two persons died and nine persons sustained injuries, therefore, it cannot be said that applicants are innocent, however, they could not dispute the fact that co-accused Manoj Kumar Yadav and Jay Kumar Yadav have already been released on bail by this Court and as far as allegation of assault is concerned, the case of applicants is at par with them. They however further submitted on the pointing out of applicants, the weapons alleged to have been used in the crime were also recovered. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 10. However, as per allegation, applicants and eleven others made assault through iron rod and wooden sticks due to which two persons died and nine persons sustained injuries but only general allegations have been leveled against all the accused including applicants and co-accused Manoj Kumar Yadav and Jay Kumar Yadav and both the above accused have been released on bail by this Court with a detailed and reasoned order and as far as incident of assault is concerned, the case of applicants is at par with them. 11. Further, however, as per prosecution, when applicants wre arrested along with others including co-accused Manoj Kumar Yadav and Jay Kumar Yadav then they confessed their guilt and on their pointing out four wooden sticks and two iron rods were recovered but from the perusal of the recovery memo it reflects, recovery was made from under construction building and considering this fact, in view of this Court, merely on the basis of above recover,y at this stage, it is hard to believe that applicant involved in the present matter. 12. 12. Further, applicants are not having any criminal history and in the present matter they is in jail since 08.05.2024 i.e. for last more than ten months. 13. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicants are entitled to be released on bail. 14. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 15. Let the applicants-Chandranath and Suryanath 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 applicanta shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless their personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicants shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicants shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 16. 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 applicants. 17. 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 :- 15.4.2025 SKM Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad