JUDGMENT : (Alok Kumar Verma, J.) : The present Application has been filed for regular bail in connection with the First Information Report No. 138 of 2018, registered at police station Jaspur, District Udham Singh Nagar. 2. The applicant- Narender Sharma is in judicial custody for the offence under Sections 302, 307, 120B and Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 3. The case of the respondent is that on 25.05.2018, the informant Smt. Bhajan Kaur was present in her house with her husband Daya Singh, daughter-in-law Charanjeet Kaur, brother of her daughter-in-law Devendra Singh alias Labba, his wife Babbi and his son Happy. At around 11:00 a.m., two persons entered her house and pointed a country made pistol at her chest. They fired at her husband Daya Singh, aged about 63 years, due to which he died. Devendra Singh alias Labba was also shot, due to which, he received injuries. After inquest proceedings, post-mortem examination and last rites of the deceased, the First Information Report was lodged on 25.05.2018 at 20:30 hrs. The First Information Report was registered against the two unknown persons. 4. The deceased had two sons. One is Jagtar Singh alias Jagga and the name of the other son is Meher Singh. Jagtar Singh alias Jagga’s brother-in-law Devendra Singh alias Labba had enmity with one Gurmukh Singh alias Gorkha. Devendra Singh alias Labba went to jail because of Gurmukh Singh. Devendra Singh alias Labba (co-accused) along with his friend Aleem (co-accused) settled the matter with the present applicant and Shankar Sharma alias Ravi (co-accused) for rupees ten lakhs to take revenge from Gurmukh Singh. One lakh was given in advance. After the incident, the present applicant and co-accused Shankar Sharma alias Ravi fled away on a motor cycle, bearing Registration No.UK06-L9443. 5. One empty cartridge was recovered from the possession of the present applicant at the time of his arrest. A country made pistol 315 bore and a live cartridge were recovered from the possession of the co-accused Shankar Sharma alias Ravi. One bullet 315 bore and one empty cartridge 315 bore were recovered from the spot. One bullet 315 bore was recovered from the dead body of the deceased at the time of post-mortem examination. One country made pistol and a pistol 315 bore were recovered at the instance of the present applicant and the co-accused Shankar Sharma alias Ravi. One bullet 315 bore and one empty cartridge 315 bore were recovered from the spot. One bullet 315 bore was recovered from the dead body of the deceased at the time of post-mortem examination. One country made pistol and a pistol 315 bore were recovered at the instance of the present applicant and the co-accused Shankar Sharma alias Ravi. The said motorcycle was recovered from the custody of the present applicant and the said co-accused. The bullet recovered from the dead body of the deceased, the bullet and empty cartridge recovered from the spot and the country made pistol, live cartridge and empty cartridge, recovered from the accused persons, were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory. 6. Heard Mr. Vikas Anand, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. V.K. Jemini, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State. 7. Mr. Vikas Anand, Advocate, has contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. The alleged recoveries were planted. Smt. Charanjeet Kaur (PW2) and the ballistic report do not support the case of the prosecution. Applicant is not a previous convict. He is a permanent resident of District Muzaffarnagar (Uttar Pradesh). Applicant was not the owner of the alleged recovered motorcycle. Applicant is in judicial custody since 30.05.2018, and, the co-accused of the similar role, namely, Shankar Sharma alias Ravi has been granted bail by this Court. 8. On the other hand, Mr. V.K. Jemini, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State has opposed the bail application orally. However, he submits that the co-accused of the similar role has already been granted bail by this Court. 9. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, no reason is found to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merit of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage. 10. The Bail Application is allowed. 11. 10. The Bail Application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant- Narender Sharma be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- i) Applicant shall attend the Trial Court regularly and he will not seek any unnecessary adjournment; ii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case. 12. It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the prosecution agency will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.