(1.) THIS appli cation has been filed by the applicant Ras eed with a prayer that he may be released on bail in Case Crime No. 384 of 2006 under sections 307 & 326 I.P.C., P.S. Naini, District Allahabad.
(2.) THE facts in brief of this case are that the FIR of this case has been lodged by Sabir Khan on 28.11.2006 at 8.40 a.m. against the applicant and co -accused Shakeel, in respect of the incident which had occurred on 28.11.2008 at about 8.00 a.m. The distance of the police station was about half km. from the alleged place of occurrence. It is alleged that applicant was having enmity with the family of the first informant. The father of the first informant who is the injured of this case is a Teacher in I.T.I. Naini, on account of enmity an as sault was made on the injured Saleem Khan on 28.3.2006 at about 8.00 a.m. The applicant and co -accused Shakeel came on a motorcycle and a bomb was hurdled by Shakeel, consequently the injured sustained injury. The applicant and another co -accused were chased but they successfully ran away from the alleged place of occur rence. The injured was sent to Jeevan Jyoti Hospital, Allahabad for medical treatment. According to the medical examination re port the injured Saleem Khan had sus tained bomb blast injury in which injury No. 1 was grievous in nature is on the left upper arm, the amputation of left upper arm below the shoulder joint has taken place and injury No. 2 was abraded contu sion on left side of the chest. The injury No. 1 was grievous in nature and injury No. 2 was simple in nature. The applicant ap plied for bail before learned in charge Ses sions Judge, Allahabad who rejected the same on 13.8.2007.
(3.) IT is contended by learned Counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent person he has not committed the alleged offence. He has been falsely implicated in the present case on account of previous enmity. The role of causing the injury has not been assigned to the applicant, it has been assigned to co -accused Shakeel. The only allegation against the applicant is that he and co -accused Shakeel came on an motorcycle at the alleged place of occur rence and co -accused Shakeel hurdled the bomb, consequently, injured sustained in jury. The bail application of the applicant has been rejected by learned in charge Ses sions Judge only on the basis of criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant has been falsely implicated in Case Crime No. 193 of 2004 under section 302 I.P.C., P.S. Raniganj, District Pratpgarh. The ap plicant was acquitted on 2.6.1998 vide S.T. No. 584 of 1994 by learned Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh. The applicant was falsely im plicated in Case Crime No. 283 of 1994 un der section 3 of U.P. Control of Goondas Act, P.S. Raniganj, District Pratapgarh in which the proceedings have been dropped and in remaining two cases, i.e. Case Crime No. 26 of 2003 under sections 452, 392, 323, 504, 506 and 325 I.P.C., P.S. Raniganj, Dis trict Pratapgarh and in Case Crime No. 52 of 2006 under sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504 and 506 I.P.C., P.S. Raniganj, District Pratapgarh the applicant has been released on bail. There is no independent witness to support the prosecution story. The applicant is in jail since 12.7.2007 and the applicant is ready to furnish reliable sureties bond to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.