Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of applicants and counter affidavit filed on behalf of first informant, both are taken on record.
Heard Sri Mohd. Shoeb Khan, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, learned counsel on behalf of opposite party, Sri Sanjay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the record.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case by the firs informant due to village party bandi and enmity regarding property dispute. The present case is cross case, both side persons received injury on their person, the said fact has been mentioned in paragraph 6 to the supplementary affidavit. It is further submitted that as per statement of injured Deep Chand it is evident that he has sustained a single fire arm injury on forearm and the role of causing the aforesaid injury has been assigned to co-accused Vipin Singh, the said fact has been mentioned in paragraph no. 20 to the affidavit filed in support of bail application. Criminal history of the applicants have properly been explained in paragraph 25 and 26 to the affidavit filed in support of bail application. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicants have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicants that they are ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make themselves available before the court whenever required. The applicant no. 1 is languishing in jail since 24.06.2020 and the applicant no. 2 is languishing in jail since 26.06.2020. They undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty, if granted, therefore, they may be released on bail.
Learned counsel on behalf of opposite party as well as learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, (2018) 3 SCC 22, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let the applicants- Akash alias Mantu Kannaujia and Bechu Yadav involved in Case Crime No. 217 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504, 506, 120B IPC and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Pipraich, District Gorakhpur be released on bail, on their executing a personal bond and two heavy sureties (from both of the applicants) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:
1. The applicants will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.
2. They will not tamper with the witnesses.
3. They will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicants to prison.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
The party is permitted to file a computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of Allahabad High Court before the court concerned, who shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of Allahabad High Court and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 22.2.2021 Arti