The accused's conduct during the investigation and trial, including absconding and attempts to influence the investigation, was crucial in determining the bail application's rejection.

( 1 ) THIS bail application has been filed by Tauseef Ahmad @ Tauseem in Case Crime No, 328 of 2004, Under Section 302, 307, 34 IPC, P. S. Asmoli, district Moradabad.

( 2 ) ENCAPSULATED facts in the thumbnail description are registered thus. Amar Singh Verma (informant) on 12,6. 2004 had gone to his village Madala Fatepur from Moradabad on vacation, in the night intervening between 12/13 ,6,2004 he alongwith his siblings elder brother Vijay singh and two younger brothers Rajveer Singh and Aman Singh alongwith nephew Sumit kumar were sleeping on their platform on the cot. Sumit Kumar was sleeping on the same cot alongwith Rajveer Singh, In the night at about 1. 30 A. M. on 13. 6. 2004 the three named accused persons Asrat and Asrar both s/o Sharafat Husain and Tauseem s/o Asrat (present applicant)armed with country made pistol came to the said platform (Chabutra) and at the instigation of accused Asrat, accused Asrar shot at Rajveer, younger brother of the informant. The shot hit sumit Kumar and also caused a gun shot entry wound at the back of Rajveer Singh and an gun shot exit would through his abdomen. The informant Amar Singh Verma, his brother Vijay singh and Aman Singh witnessed the incident in the light of a lantern. Accused persons were well known to them as they belonged to the same Mohalla (locality ). On their hue and cry and hearing the gunfire many persons collected on the spot. The present applicant Tauseef Ahmad @ tauseem also opened fire at Amar Singh Verma (informant) but it did not cause any injury to any body. The accused persons made their escaped good after the incident. The motive of the incident was alleged to be old enmity. As the condition of Rajveer and Sumit Kumar were serious they were carried to the hospital by the patrol police party accompanied by other brothers of informant. Amar Singh Verma, regarding the said incident, lodged a FIR at the police station asmoli, district Moradabad on 13. 6. 2004 at 6. 15 A. M. vide crime no, 328/04, Under Section 307 ipc, which was subsequently converted into 302/34, 307 IPC, as the injured Rajveer Singh lost his life because of the sustained injuries in the said shooting. The post mortem report of Rajveer singh and injury report of Sumit Kumar, a boy of 10 years indicates that both had sustained firearm wound of injuries.

( 3 ) ON these facts the present applicant has approached this Court for bail through the above noted bail application after its rejection by both the courts bellows.

( 4 ) I have heard Sri V. P. Srivastava learned senior counsel assisted by Sri S. M. Iqbal Hasan, learned Counsel for the applicant on bail prayer of the present applicant and Sri Viresh Mishra, learned senior counsel on behalf of the informant as well as learned AGA in opposition,

( 5 ) SRI V. P. Srivastava contended that according to the prosecution case itself the shot fired by the applicant did not cause any injury to any body. He further contended that the local police has investigated the matter and had found the case to be false and the witnesses also said that they did not know that as to who had fired the shot at the deceased and injured and for this submission he invited the attention of the court to the statements of various witnesses including rajeshwari, Hari Om and others. Learned senior counsel further submitted that according to the statement of these witnesses the first informant was not present at the time of incident. He further submitted that annexure 9 is the statement of Sub Inspector Om Datt Sharma who had taken the injured to Yashoda Nursing Home, for treatment in which he had stated that the informant was not present at the time of the incident and none had disclosed the names of the assailants in his presence and till the arrival of informant from Moradabad no FIR was registered. He further contended that the statement of Vijai Singh Verma eyewitness was recorded after four days. He further contended that at the behest of the informant th