Reserved Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32428 of 2009 Petitioner :- Gufran Ahmad Respondent :- State Of U.P. Petitioner Counsel :- Ajay Kumar Pandey,Anil Kumar Shukla,Shri Satish Trivedi Respondent Counsel :- Govt Advocate AND Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33250 of 2009 Petitioner :- Muslim @ Guddu Respondent :- State Of U.P. Petitioner Counsel :- Khan Saulat Hanif,Ravindra Sharma Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Kant Tripathi,J. 1. These two bail applications have been filed relating to the same case crime no. 34 of 2005 under sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 506 and 120-B IPC and section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, police station Dhoomanganj, district Allahabad, hence are being disposed of by this common order. 2. Heard Mr. Satish Trivedi, learned senior counsel for the applicant Gufran Ahmad and Mr. Ravindra Sharma for the applicant Muslim @ Guddu, Mr. Mewa Lal Shukla, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 3. According to the allegations made in the FIR on 25.1.2005 at about 3.00 PM, the complainant's husband Raju Pal (an MLA) and his associates Devi Lal Pall and Sandeep Yadav were killed by seven-eight persons. Three persons, namely, Om Prakash, Saifulla and Smt. Rukhsana sustained gun shot injuries. It is alleged in the FIR that Mr. Atiq Ahmad, the then Member of Parliament, belonging to the Samajwadi Party, managed the murder of the complainant's husband with the help of 7-8 persons including his brother Ashraf, who had contested an election against the complainant's husband. The police investigated the matter and submitted charge sheet against Atiq Ahmad, his brother Ashraf and other persons, against whom the trial continued and as many as fourteen witnesses were examined but none of them supported the prosecution story. In the meantime Bahujan Samajwadi Party came in power in the State, consequently a further investigation, was directed to be held by CB CID, and the CB CID, after investigation submitted a supplementary charge sheet against the applicants and other accused. 4. The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that all the accused persons mentioned in the first charge sheet, and also the co-accused Nafees Ahmad @ Nafees Kalia mentioned in the supplementary charge sheet, have already been enlarged on bail, therefore, both the applicants are entitled to bail on the ground of parity. The learned counsel further submitted that the supplementary charge sheet is nothing except a concocted version at the behest of the ruling party. It was further submitted that none of the witnesses examined during the trial against the accused mentioned in the first charge sheet, has supported the prosecution story, therefore, it is a case of no evidence. It was further submitted that the deceased Raju Pal had a criminal history of 27cases (Annexure X), therefore, a possibility of his killing by some other person can not be ruled out. 5. Mr. Mewa Lal Shukla, learned AGA submitted