JUDGMENT :

Learned counsel for the applicants does not want to press this application in respect of applicant no.2-Devesh Dixit because he is minor aged about six years. Therefore, his anticipatory bail application may be dismissed as not pressed.

2. Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Anticipatory Bail Application in respect of applicant no.2-Devesh Dixit is dismissed as not pressed.

3. Heard Sri. Akhilesh Chandra Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant no.1-Smt. Anita Sharma, Sri Amit Daga and Sri Namman Raj Vanshi, learned counsels for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

4. This anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant no.1 -Smt. Anita Sharma, seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.30 of 2021, under Sections -147, 148, 302, 504, 506, 394 I.P.C., Police Station -Paratapur, District Meerut, during the pendency of trial.

5. At the outset, objection was raised by Sri Amit Daga, learned counsel for the informant that the present case is barred by Section – 438 (6) Cr.P.C. as the offence inter-alia, is under Section – 302 I.P.C., therefore, it is not cognizable by this Court.

6. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that he has filed supplementary affidavit but the same is not on record, however, office copy of supplementary affidavit dated 29.06.2021 supplied in Court is taken on record. Learned A.G.A. assented to the receipt of the supplementary affidavit given by the counsel for the applicant.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the observation of the division Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Writ petition No. 3194 of 2021, copy whereof is at Page Nos. 8 and 9 in the supplementary affidavit, wherein the prayer for quashment of the first information report was refused on 12.05.2021. However, certain observation was made in the last paragraph of the aforesaid order that the deceased died out of 'septicemia', therefore, prima facie provisions of Section 302 I.P.C. will not be attracted in this case, whereas, Section -304 I.P.C. Hence, the bar in filing anticipatory bail application would not come in the way of the petitioner-applicant and it may be treated to be a case under Section -304 I.P.C. That being the position, this anticipatory bail application, apart from its merit, just for the sake of aforesaid observation be entertained, as such. Now, the merit of this claim is to be gone into at this stage.

8. Before proceeding further in this case, it would be relevant to take note of the fact (as alleged in the F.I.R.) -the very genesis of the F.I.R. registered against the applicant. Bare perusal of the F.I.R. itself is reflective of fact that as per the version contained in the first information report, a call was given to the informant on the cell phone no.9997699155 on 12.01.2021 at about 3:00 a.m. by accused Dr. Pradeep son of Beg Raj by his cell phone no.9358672920, the informant (father of the victim-Akash) reached the house of the applicant, whereupon he saw Dr. Pradeep and his wife and his son assaulting Vikas alias Akash aged about 18 years by lathi, danda and iron rod. Apart from that, they were also abusing him. The informant rushed to the spot and tried to save his son. When the informant asked to know about the matter, then he too was abused and threatened by the accused persons. The informant took his son to the hospital whose condition was serious. It has been alleged in the F.I.R. that the treatment is underway but the injured is serious. As per the version contained in the F.I.R., it appears that the informant Richhpal son of Ram Sharan handed over the report to the police on 13.01.2021, whereupon the F.I.R. was registered at Case Crime No. 30 of 2021, under Sections – 323, 504, 307, 352, 506, 325 I.P.C. on 16.01.2021. Lastly, the injured died on 29.01.2021, therefore, Sections 302 and 394 I.P.C. were added against the accused during investigation.

9. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed r