Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:78442 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13080 of 2025 Applicant :- Rahman Shah And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abha Pandey,Lal Ji Pandey,Shankarshan Bankata Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Ms. Abha Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicants on bail in Case Crime No. 325 of 2024, under Sections 45/46/61/61(2)/62/105/106/324(4)/324(5) BNS & 5/9B/9C Explosive Act and 3/4/5 Explosive Substances Act Police Station- Sirauli, District- Bareilly, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that however, as per allegation, due to cracker explosion in the house of the applicant no.1 number of persons died but admittedly, son-in-law of the applicant no.1 i.e. co-accused Nasir was owner of the cracker factory and he was having license for the same. She further submitted that being his father-in-law, applicant no.1 could not refuse him to keep explosive in his house and, therefore, principal accused of the case is co-accused Nasir, son-in-law of the applicant no. 1. 4. She further submitted that in the unfortunate incident, daughter- in-law of applicant no.1 and his two grand children also lost their lives, therefore, applicants also suffered a lot. 5. She further submitted that it is a case of mere an accident and applicants were not having any intention to cause death of anyone. 6. She further submitted that along with applicants, co-accused Nazim, Ahmad Miya@ Sujha and Mohd. Miya@ Bhura and Husnain were also made accused and they have been released on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.05.2025 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 11333 of 2025 and case of applicant is almost at par with them. 7. She further submitted that in the alleged incident even applicant no.1 also sustained serious injuries. 8. She further submitted that applicants are not having any criminal history and they are in jail in the present matter since 09.10.2024 i.e. for last six months. 9. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that due to illegal act of the applicants and others, seven persons died and applicant no.1 himself sustained serious injuries but could not dispute the fact that the crackers were illegally being manufactured by accused Nasir, son-in-law of the applicant no.1 and he was the person, who was having license. 10. He further could not dispute the fact that in the alleged unfortunate incident, even daughter-in-law and two grand children of applicant no.1 also lost their lives. 11. He further could not dispute the fact that four other persons, who were also named in the FIR along with applicants, have been released on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. 12. He further could not dispute the fact that in the alleged incident even applicant no.1 sustained serious injuries and applicants are not having any criminal history and they are in jail in the present matter for last six months. 13. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 14. However, as per allegation, due to illegal cracker manufacturing in the house of the applicant no.1 explosion took place, in which, as many as seven persons died and in the incident, even applicant no.1 also sustained serious injuries but it reflects, in the incident even close family members of the applicants also lost their lives. 15. Record also suggests that along with applicants, co-accused Nazim, Ahmad Miya@ Sujha and Mohd. Miya@ Bhura and Husnain , relatives of the applicants, were also made accused and they have been released on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. 16. Further, from the entire material available on record, it cannot be said that it is not the case of accident and it also could not be reflected that applicants were having any intention to cause death of anyone. 17. Further, it is a case, in which, applicants also suffered a lot. 18. Further, applicants are not having any criminal history and they are in jail in the present matter since 09.10.2024 i.e. for last six months. 19. Further, law is settled, bail application of an accused should not be dismissed for punitive purpose. 20. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 21. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 22. Let the applicants- Rahman Shah and Wahid 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 applicants shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his 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 him 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. 23. 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. 24. 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 :- 13.5.2025 KK Patel Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad