1. Heard Sri Vishnu Murti Tripathi, learned counsel for applicant- Man Singh, Sri Kripa Shankar Pandey, learned counsel for applicant-Santlal, Sri Pawan Shukla, learned counsel for applicant- Dharmendra, Sri Sunil Chaudhary, learned counsel for informant and Sri Roshan Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for State. 2. None appeared on behalf of applicant-Dilip Kumar. 3. Applicants are seeking bail arising out of Case Crime No.191 of 2022 under Sections 307, 352, 326A/34 and 420 of I.P.C. Police Station-Charwa, District-Kaushambi.

4. All the bail applications are arising out of same case crime number, therefore, decided by this common order.

5. Present case is arising out of an occurrence of an Acid attack. 6. Victim was working as a Bank Manager. On day of occurrence while she was travelling, two unknown persons came on a motorcycle and threw acid on her. A prompt F.I.R. was lodged by her father.

7. During investigation, name of applicant and other co-accused came into light that they all act as Brokers in the bank to facilitate sanctioning of loan etc and when the victim while exercising her duties as Bank Manager rejected some of loan applications, she was pressurized. However, when she did not succumb to their pressure it led her to suffer an acid attack.

8. It has been brought on record that some of co-accused have been granted bail mainly on ground that their names were disclosed in confessional statement of co-accused. However, bail application of one of co-accused namely Mohd. Azam was rejected by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.2.2023, Neutral Citation No.2023:AHC:41353.

9. According to prosecution story, all accused persons hatched a conspiracy to commit crime of acid attack to deter the victim to succumb to pressure and to pass loan illegally. Victim has submitted various applications that not only she, but her family was pressurized to withdraw the case. However, it appears that cognizance has not been taken of it. Documents in this regard are being part of counter affidavit which is filed by son of informant.

10. Co-ordinate Bench while rejecting bail application of co- accused Mohd. Azam has also taken note of injury report of victim, CCTV Footage, call detail reports as well as criminal history of twenty cases registered against him.

11. Arguments have been raised by counsel for applicants that motive assigned was not supported by any cogent evidence.

Theory of conspiracy also does not have support of any cogent evidence. There was no eye witness that applicants were involved in actual crime, other co-accused have already been granted bail and that victim has not suffered any grievious injury.

12. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that applicants are languishing in jail since 17.8.2022 and 18.8.2022 respectively i.e. about one year and eight months and there is no likelihood of early disposal of trial and the applicants undertake that if enlarged on bail, they will never misuse their liberty and will co-operate in the trial.

13. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for informants have vehemently opposed the bail applications and referred documents placed on record by way of above referred counter affidavit, wherein there is discharge summary of the victim that she was given treatment at a hospital with history of chemical burn for surgical management in the Department of Plastic Surgery of Apollo Hospital.

14. Legislature has taken note that incidents of acid attack frequently occurred, therefore, in the year 2013, Section 326A of IP.C. was inserted by an Act 13 of 2013 and for reference same is mentioned hereinafter:

“S.326A : Voluntarily causing grievous hurt by use of acid, etc.

[Whoever causes permanent or partial damage or deformity to, or burns or maims or disfigures or disables, any part or parts of the body of a person or causes grievous hurt by throwing acid on or by administering acid to that person, or by using any other means with the intention of causing or with the knowledge tha