JUDGMENT :

1. Heard A. Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the case.

2. An exemption application has been filed on behalf of the applicants along with present application for exempting the filing of certified copy of the F.I.R. as it could not be made available to the applicants due to COVID-19.

3. The exemption application is allowed.

4. The filing of certified copy of the F.I.R. is hereby exempted.

5. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicants Aamil @ Chamman, Kadir, Afsan Afnan and Salim with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 0018 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 325, 307, 504 of I.P.C., Police Station-Kiratpur District-Bijnor, during pendency of trial.

6. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case with ulterior motive. The first information report has been lodged against the applicants and other co-accused Mobin with general allegation to commit marpeet by iron rod, lathidanda and tabal. In this incident Shamim received 9 injuries. It has further been submitted that wife of the applicant no. 2 Kadir has lodged a first information report as cross case crime no. 28 of 2021 against informant and other 4 persons under sections 147, 323, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C. It has further been submitted that the incident took place in the house of the informant. Applicant no. 2 and informant are injured in the incident. No incriminating article has been recorded from the possession of the applicants. Iron rod is recovered on the instance of co-accused Mobin. It has further been submitted that co-accused Mobin has already been released on bail by a coordinate bench of this court vide order dated 15.7.2021 in Cr. Misc. Bail Application No. 15518 of 2021. Applicants are languishing in jail since 16.3.2021. Chargesheet has been submitted against all 5 named accused persons.

7. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

8. It is settled position of law that bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception in the case of State of Rajasthan Vs. Balchand @ Baliay (1977) 4 SCC 308, the Apex Court observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and opined para 2 "The basic rule may perhaps be tersely put as bail, not jail, except where there are circumstances suggestive of fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like, by the petitioner who seeks enlargement on bail from the court. We do. not intend to be exhaustive but only illustrative." and considering the facts of the case and keeping in mind, the ratio of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors vs Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 429, larger mandate of Article 21 of the constitution of India, the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused-applicant, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interest of the public/ State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail.

9. Let applicants Aamil @ Chamman, Kadir, Afsan Afnan and Salim be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions-

(i) The appli