High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 70 Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:141911 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15658 of 2023 Applicant :- Jeeshan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Singh,Akshaivar Singh,Ashish Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Pankaj Satsangi, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ashish Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Tanay Kumar, learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 10 of 2022, under Sections 302, 386, 34 IPC, Police Station Kutubsher, District Saharanpur during pendency of the trial.
Legal Reasoning
3. FIR of the present case was lodged against applicant and three others and according to the FIR applicant and co-accused persons inflicted knife injury to the son-in-law of the informant and due to the injury caused by them subsequently he died. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that entire allegation made against the applicant is totally false and baseless and applicant did not participate in the alleged incident and it appears that incident occurred in the late night and only due to enmity, applicant has been implicated in the present matter along with other other accused persons. He further submits that admittedly informant of the case is not an eye witness. 5. He further submits that according to the FIR the incident was witnessed by Muaz @ Teepu, Fazil and Naseem but Muaz was one of the Panch witness and when he was examined as Panch witness by the Investigating Officer then he stated that after receiving information he came to know that deceased was murdered but in spite of this fact when his second statement was recorded by the Investigating Officer under Section 161 Cr.P.C. then he claimed himself as an eye witness but considering his first statement as Panch witness it is apparent that he is not an eye witness. He further submits that the remaining two eye witnesses Fazil and Naseem only made general allegation against all the accused persons and they did not state that applicant inflicted knife injuries, therefore, except the statement of Muaz there is no evidence on record on the basis of which it can be said at this stage that applicant along with co-accused Sharan caused knife injuries to the deceased as except these three witnesses there are no eye witness account. 6. He further submits that although bail application of co-accused Ali Shan has been dismissed by this Court but on the other hand bail application of co-accused Sharan has been allowed by the co- ordinate Bench of this Court and bail order of co-accused Sharan has been appended at page 60 of the paper book. 7. He further submits that applicant is having previous criminal history of about 27 cases but he has explained his criminal history in paragraph-24 to the affidavit and from its perusal it appears that most of the cases showing against the applicant is of cow slaughter Act. 8. He further submits that in the present matter applicant is in jail since 11.01.2022 i.e. for almost one and half years. 9. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that along with applicant other co-accused persons were named in the FIR and all the witnesses also stated that he participated along with other accused persons and post mortem report also suggests that deceased sustained a stab wound. He next submits that applicant is having criminal history of as many as 27 cases but learned AGA could not dispute the fact that majority of the cases pending against the applicant relate to cow slaughter Act and co-accused Sharan has already been released on bail by the co- ordinate Bench of this Court. However, learned AGA further submits that bail application of co-accused Ali Shan has been dismissed by this Court. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. From the perusal of record, it appears that informant is not an eye witness and he stated that Muaz @ Teepu, Fazil and Naseem witnessed the incident but he named the applicant and other accused persons in the FIR. Further, although in the second statement co-accused Muaz @ Teepu stated that applicant along with Sharan inflicted knife injuries to the deceased and other two co-accused persons caught him but when his earlier statement was recorded by the Investigating Officer as a witness of inquest then he stated that he received an information that deceased died due to alleged incident and in his first statement he did not claim himself as an eye witness. 12. Further, although another two witnesses Fazil and Naseem stated that applicant along with other three nominated accused persons participated in the incident but they did not state that applicant inflicted knife injuries to the deceased and only general role has been assigned by both witnesses to all accused persons including applicant. 13. Further, from the perusal of the post mortem it appears that deceased sustained one stab wound through and through on his thigh, therefore, it appears that due to excessive bleeding caused by stab wound on thigh he died. 14. Although, applicant is having criminal history of 27 cases but from perusal of the criminal history, which has been explained in paragraph-24 of the affidavit it appears that majority of the cases were of cow slaughter Act. Further, although bail application of co-accused Ali Shan has been dismissed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court but from the record it further reflects that bail application of co-accused Sharan has been allowed by another co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.01.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 23863 of 2022. 15. Further, applicant in the present matter is in jail since January, 2022 i.e. for almost one and half years. 16. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 17. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 18. Let the applicant - Jeeshan be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 19. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 20. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 18.7.2023 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad