Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:90775 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14269 of 2025 Applicant :- Kadeem Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vishal Pandey,Vivek Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ram Raj Pandey,Shubham Pandey Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Vivek Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Ram Raj Pandey, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Shatrughan Yadav, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 257 of 2024, under Sections 302, 504, 506, 34 IPC and section 4/25 Arms Act, Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that however, applicant is named in the FIR alongwith three others and as per allegation he alongwith others committed murder of the deceased by inflicting knife injuries to him but entire allegations levelled against the applicant are totally false. 5. He further submitted that even motive assigned to the applicant, prima facie, appears to be quite weak and it is not possible that due to that motive applicant and others would commit the murder of the deceased. 6. He further submitted that however, bail application of co- accused Shafik @ Haddi has been dismissed by the co-ordiante Bench of this Court vide order dated 4.9.2024 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 31385 of 2024 but at the time of rejecting the bail application entire facts of the case could not be placed before the Court concerned. He further submitted that even there is no parity of bail rejection order. 7. He next submits, however, from the FIR it reflects that informant was also alongwith deceased at the time of incident and after hearing shriek of the informant, number of other persons arrived at spot but prima facie, from the record, it appears, nobody could not see the real incident and only due to previous dispute, applicant has been roped in the present matter alongwith his other family members. 8. He further submitted that apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of six others cases but his criminal antecedents have been explained in the supplementary affidavit filed in support to the instant bail application. 9. He further submitted that in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 22.5.2024 i.e. for last more than a year. 10. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant is named in the FIR alongwith others including co-accused Shafik @ Haddi and after considering entire facts of the case, bail application of co-accused Shafik @ Haddi has been dismissed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. 11. They further submitted that as far as merit of the present case is concerned, there are eye witnesses and they categorically stated that applicant and other accused persons by inflicting knife injuries committed murder of the deceased and post mortem report also corroborates their version and there is no reason to disbelieve the statements of the eye witnesses. 12. They further submitted that applicant is also having previous criminal history of as many as six other cases and therefore, he does not deserve bail. 13. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 14. Applicant is named in the FIR alongwith others and as per allegation, he alongwith other accused by inflicting knife injuries committed the murder of the deceased and there are several eye witnesses. 15. Further, this Court finds merit in the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA that at this stage, there is no reason to disbelieve the statements of eye witnesses. 16. Further, even bail application of co-accused Shafik @ Haddi has been dismissed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court and as far as facts of the case are concerned, allegations made against the applicant are similar to co-accused Shafik @ Haddi. 17. Further, apart from the present case, applicant is also having previous criminal history of six other cases to his credit. 18. Further, however, applicant is in jail in the present matter since 22.5.2024 i.e. last more than a year but considering the nature of allegations levelled against the applicant, in view of this Court merely on the basis of incarceration of one year, it is not proper to release the applicant on bail specially considering his criminal antecedents. 19. Accordingly, the instant bail application stands rejected. 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 :- 27.5.2025 Ankita Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad