JUDGMENT : Alok Kumar Verma, J. The First Bail Applications of the applicants were dismissed as withdrawn on 13.07.2023. 2. Applicant- Mansoor is in judicial custody under Sections 307, 323, 324, 504 and Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, “IPC”). Applicant Aazam and the applicant Mukkarram are in judicial custody under Sections 307, 323, 324, 504, 506 IPC and Section 4 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959. 3. These Bail Applications have arisen from one Crime No. i.e. Case Crime No.220 of 2023, registered at police station Gang Nahar, Roorkee, District Haridwar. Therefore, these bail applications are being considered and decided by this common order. Record of the Bail Application No.230 of 2023 will be leading file. 4. Facts, to the limited extent, are that on 26.04.2023, at around 10:15 a.m., the informant Smt. Kaushar, her husband Sanavwar, her father-in-law Haneef and her brother-in-law Raees were constructing their another house in front of their house. The applicants came there with sword, stick and palkati. The applicant-Mansoor told his sons, applicant Aazam and applicant-Mukkarram, that they are constructing house, kill them. They suffered injuries in the assault by the applicants. The injured persons were treated in the Civil Hospital, Roorkee. The condition of Haneef and Sanavwar was serious, so they were referred to the higher centre Dehradun. The First Information Report was registered at 19:48 hrs on 26.04.2023. A sword was recovered on the pointing out of the applicant Aazam and Mukkaram. The said sword was sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory. Upon conclusion of the investigation, charge-sheet has been filed. 5. Heard Mr. Arvind Vashisth, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. R.P. Singh, learned counsel for applicants, Mr. V.K. Gemini, learned Deputy Advocate General for State and Mr. Deep Chandra Joshi, learned counsel for victims. 6. Mr. Arvind Vashisth, learned Senior Advocate, contended that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present matter. According to the injury reports, there was no injury caused by the sword. The said recovery of sword was planted. The alleged recovery has been shown from the open place. The present applicant-Mansoor and the applicant-Aazam were also injured. Applicant-Aazam was sent to the hospital through police. A copy of injury report of the applicant Aazam has been filed by the applicants. 7. Mr. The said recovery of sword was planted. The alleged recovery has been shown from the open place. The present applicant-Mansoor and the applicant-Aazam were also injured. Applicant-Aazam was sent to the hospital through police. A copy of injury report of the applicant Aazam has been filed by the applicants. 7. Mr. Arvind Vashisth, learned Senior Advocate, further submitted that the applicants do not have any criminal antecedents. They are permanent residents of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no possibility of their absconding. Applicant-Aazam and Applicant Mukkarram are in custody since 27.04.2023 and the applicant Mansoor, aged about 55 years, is in judicial custody since 19.05.2023. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. 8. Mr. V.K. Gemini, learned Deputy Advocate General, and Mr. Deep Chandra Joshi, learned counsel for victims, have opposed the Bail Applications and submitted that the injured Haneef and Sanavwar have suffered grievous injuries. However, they fairly conceded that there is nothing on record to show that the applicants had earlier been involved in any unacceptable activities. 9. Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused. 10. 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 applicants 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 applicants deserve bail at this stage. 11. The Bail Applications are allowed. 12. Let the applicants – Mansoor, Aazam and Mukkarram be released on bail on their executing personal bonds and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions:- (i) Applicants shall attend the Trial Court regularly and they shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment, and (ii) Applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case. 13. 13. It is clarified that if the applicants misuse or violate any of the conditions, imposed upon them, the prosecution agency will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail. 14. A copy of this order be placed on the record of Bail Application No.246 of 2023 and Bail Application No.249 of 2023.