Zakir Ali v. State of Uttarakhand

5. The first bail application of the Applicant was filed directly before this Hon’ble Court as BAI No. 2775 of 2023 and was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 26.12.2023, with liberty to move before the appropriate forum. Subsequently, the Applicant moved a regular bail application before the learned court below, which was rejected by the learned Third Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rudrapur, vide order dated 04.01.2024. The present application is, therefore, the second one before this Court.

6. It is also on record that during the pendency of trial, the Jail Superintendent, Sub-Jail Haldwani, wrote a letter dated 21.12.2023 to the learned trial court informing that the Applicant was suffering from multiple serious ailments including, HCV Reactive condition, Chronic Liver Disease, Hepatocellular Jaundice, and Hypertension, and requested that his case be considered under Chapter XXV, Clause 577 of the Uttarakhand Jail Manual. The Applicant has annexed this letter along with his medical papers in support of his prayer for bail.

7. Learned counsel for the Applicant, Mr. Mani Kumar, submitted that the Applicant has been falsely implicated and that the prosecution case is based purely on conjectures and weak circumstantial evidence. It was argued that the F.I.R. was lodged after an unexplained delay of about 2ndBail Application No. 23 of 2024, Zakir Ali Vs State of Uttarakhand- 2 Ashish Naithani J. nine days from the date of occurrence, which renders the prosecution story doubtful and gives room for manipulation.

8. Learned counsel for the Applicant contended that there is no direct eyewitness to the alleged incident. The entire case is founded on hearsay and an alleged extra-judicial confession, which is inherently unreliable and inadmissible in law. It was urged that there is no independent corroboration linking the Applicant to the alleged act of murder.

9. It was further argued that the health condition of the Applicant is precarious. He is suffering from Type III Diabetes Mellitus, Chronic Liver Disease, HCV Reactive infection, and Hepatocellular Jaundice, as certified by the Jail Superintendent, Sub-Jail Haldwani. It was submitted that the jail authorities are not adequately equipped to handle such severe medical conditions, and his continued incarceration would endanger his life.

10. Learned counsel drew the Court’s attention to the letter dated

21.12.2023 written by the Jail Superintendent to the trial court, recommending consideration of the Applicant’s release on medical grounds under Clause 577, Chapter XXV of the Jail Manual. It was urged that the Applicant’s ailments are chronic and degenerative, and despite treatment at Dr. Susheela Tiwari Government Medical College, Haldwani, his condition remains unstable.

11. It was also submitted by the counsel of the Applicant that, certain witnesses examined before the Juvenile Justice Board in the connected proceedings have not supported the prosecution version, which indicates that the prosecution case is weak and fabricated. The learned counsel therefore urged that the Applicant, a 50-year-old man in deteriorating health, deserves bail on humanitarian grounds and that 2ndBail Application No. 23 of 2024, Zakir Ali Vs State of Uttarakhand- 3 Ashish Naithani J. continued detention serves no useful purpose, especially when the investigation is complete and the trial is pending.

12. Per contra, learned Deputy A.G.A. Mr S.S. Chauhan opposed the bail application, submitting that the allegations against the Applicant are of a grave and heinous nature involving the murder of his own daughter. It was argued that the prosecution has collected ample material during investigation, including statements of witnesses and the postmortem report, establishing the prima facie involvement of the Applicant.

13. The learned Deputy A.G.A. further submitted that the plea of illness does not, by itself, entitle an accused to bail in cases of heinous offences, as adequate medical facilities are available in the jail and the Applicant has already been referred to government hospitals for treatment whenever required. It was also contended that the Applicant’s alleged confession and the surrounding circumstances show clear motive and involvement, and hence, his release at this stage may adversely affect the ongoing trial.

15. Heard learned Counsel for the Parties and perused the records. The submissions made on behalf of the Applicant, particularly on medical grounds, have been considered with due sympathy; however, they must be weighed in the context of the nature and gravity of the accusation and the material available on record.

16. The F.I.R. narrates a grave incident wherein the Applicant is alleged to have murdered his own daughter within the confines of his household and thereafter performed her cremation without informing her maternal relatives. The complaint was lodged by the uncle of the deceased after learning of the incident several days later, upon which inquiry revealed that the death had been described as a case of hanging. However, during further conversation, the Applicant is said to have 2ndBail Application No. 23 of 2024, Zakir Ali Vs State of Uttarakhand- 4 Ashish Naithani J. admitted before the complainant that he had killed his daughter owing to her alleged conduct. This sequence of events, taken cumulatively, discloses a chain of circumstances forming a prima facie case of involvement of the Applicant.

17. The contention regarding the delay in lodging the F.I.R. does not appear sufficient to cast doubt on the prosecution version at this stage. The alleged occurrence took place on 22.05.2023, and the F.I.R. was registered on 31.05.2023. The incident, being one that occurred inside the Applicant’s own home, would naturally not have been immediately known to outsiders. The delay stands adequately explained in the narrative itself, which describes that the complainant became aware of the unnatural death only when he made inquiries after the cremation. Such delay, in the circumstances of this case, does not by itself erode the credibility of the allegations.

18. It is also not in dispute that the investigation has culminated in the submission of a charge sheet under Sections 302 and 201 IPC, and the trial has already commenced before the learned Sessions Court. The charge sheet contains a detailed narration of circumstances supported by witness statements recorded during investigation. At this stage, the sufficiency or reliability of these statements cannot be weighed on the same scale as during trial. The purpose of consideration under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is not to test the evidence but to determine whether a prima facie case exists and whether any exceptional circumstance warrants release.

19. The Court is mindful of the fact that this is the Applicant’s second attempt for bail. The first application was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty, and thereafter a regular bail plea before the learned Sessions Court was also rejected on merits. Save for reiteration of the Applicant’s medical condition, no such new ground has been brought 2ndBail Application No. 23 of 2024, Zakir Ali Vs State of Uttarakhand- 5 Ashish Naithani J. on record. The allegations, the nature of the evidence, and the stage of the trial remain substantially unchanged.

20. The primary emphasis of the learned counsel for the Applicant has been on his medical condition. The record shows that the Applicant suffers from multiple ailments including diabetes, chronic liver disease, HCV reactivity, and hypertension. It is not disputed that he has been under continuous medical supervision. The letter dated 21.12.2023 from the Superintendent, Sub-Jail Haldwani, indicates that the Applicant was under treatment at Dr. Susheela Tiwari Government Medical College, Haldwani and that necessary facilities were being extended to him. On the direction of this Court while disposing of his first bail application, the Jail Superintendent was specifically instructed to ensure adequate treatment and referral to higher medical centres whenever required. No material has been brought on record to show that such directions have been disobeyed or that his medical care is being neglected.

21. It is true that illness of an undertrial is a relevant factor, yet it must be of such a nature that continued detention would result in imminent danger to life or complete denial of treatment. The mere presence of ailments, when regular medical supervision and treatment are being provided, cannot by itself constitute a compelling ground for bail in a case involving such serious accusations. The Jail Manual also prescribes the necessary procedure for referral of prisoners requiring specialised treatment, and the same has already been invoked in the Applicant’s case.

22. The plea that certain witnesses examined before the Juvenile Justice Board in the connected proceedings have not supported the prosecution story does not carry much persuasive value at this stage. The proceedings before the Board pertain to the co-accused who was 2ndBail Application No. 23 of 2024, Zakir Ali Vs State of Uttarakhand- 6 Ashish Naithani J. declared a juvenile, and the evidentiary appreciation of depositions can only be undertaken by the trial court in due course. The mere non-support of some witnesses cannot, at this interlocutory stage, be treated as an indication of the Applicant’s innocence, particularly when the prosecution version still finds support from the documentary material and other witness statements forming part of the charge sheet.

23. The gravity of the offence alleged is of the highest order, being one punishable under Section 302 IPC. The act imputed to the Applicant involves the taking of the life of his own daughter, an offence which strikes at the very foundation of familial and social trust. The manner in which the cremation was allegedly conducted without informing the maternal family further adds to the gravity of the conduct attributed to him. These factors weigh heavily against granting bail. ORDER In view of the foregoing discussion and for the reasons recorded above, this Court does not find any ground to release the Applicant, Zakir Ali, on bail. The bail application is accordingly rejected. However, is directed the Superintendent, Sub-Jail Haldwani, shall continue to ensure that the Applicant is provided with all necessary medical care and attention. In case of any medical emergency or requirement of specialized treatment, the Applicant shall be referred to a higher medical centre without delay, and compliance thereof shall be maintained by the concerned authority. (Ashish Naithani J.) Dated:20.09.2025 NR/ 2ndBail Application No. 23 of 2024, Zakir Ali Vs State of Uttarakhand- 7 Ashish Naithani J.