Ajay Bhanot,J.

1. By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.183 of 2021 at Police Station-Phoolpur, District-Prayagraj under Sections 307 and 504 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 19.08.2021.

2. The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Sessions Judge, Allahabad on 01.10.2021.

3. Shri Rajiv Lochan Shukla, learned counsel assisted by Shri Akash Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant contend that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The criminal case arises out of a petty family dispute. The injured sustained an injury at his back and was not in a position to identify the assailant. As per prosecution case set out in the F.I.R., the applicant and his father were present at the site. The applicant shot at the injured. On hearing the gun shot, the entire family of the injured gathered at the spot. Seeing the family members, they made their escape after hurling abuses/threats at the gathered family members. After the injury report of the injured became public, the statement of the injured was recorded. The statement of the injured makes a significant departure from the prosecution case set out in the F.I.R., and the statements of the witnesses given before the investigating officer. Absence of the father of the applicant as well as other family members is notable in the statement made by the injured before the investigation officer. The aforesaid contradiction is an embellishment which discredits the prosecution case. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case.

4. Shri Laldhari Rajbhar, learned A.G.A. as well as Mohd. Aslam, learned counsel holding brief of Shri Vikrant Gupta, learned counsel for the informant could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. They, however, do not dispute the fact that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.

5. I see merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

6. In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

7. Let the applicant-Priyanshu Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

(iv) The applicant 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

8. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.