High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Details
GULZAR versus STATE OF U.P.
Case Law Search
Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation
Judgement
Gulzar v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 9731 of 2005 [2006] RD-AH 2483 (1 February 2006)
|
Court no.19
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 7858 of 2005
Siraj Ahmad alias Sirajul Haq Vs. State of U.P.
---
Hon'ble R.K.Rastogi,J
The applicant has applied for bail in Case Crime No. 196 of 2004 , under sections 302/452/427 I.P.C, Police Station Manjhanpur District Kaushambi.
The prosecution case starts with a F.I.R. Lodged by Sri Indrajeet Dubey at Police Station Manjhanpur on 5.12.04 at 7.05 P.M. It is stated therein that Sri Indrajeet Dubey resides at village Nara , Police Station Manjhanpur District Kaushambi and Smt. Asha Devi wife of his real brother Banshi Lal is Pradhan of the village . Previously Pradhan of the village belonged to Muslim caste and after election of Asha Devi, Siraj Ahmad and his brother -in-law Ikrar Ahmad felt aggrieved, and they in collusion with the son of Ahmad had committed murder of the informant's brother Heera Lal on 31.3.2004. On 5.12.04 the applicant's brother Banshi Lal accompanied by Masir Ahmad had gone to the house of Masir Ahmad on a Motor Cycle at 5.45 P.M. He had parked his Motor Cycle in front of the house of Masir Ahmad and he was talking to his neighbour Sabul. At that time Siraj Ahmad and Ikrar Ahmad reached there and started to talk to his brother Banshi Lal . Thereafter they went towards graveyard and they took out pistol and then Masir shouted asking Banshi Lal to protect himself . Then Banshi Lal entered the house of Masir Ahmad and closed the door from inside. Masir ran towards the village crying for help and on hearing cries Indrajeet Dubey and his nephew Brajnandan reached there where Siraj Ahmad and Ikrar Ahmad after breaking open the door of the house of Masir Ahmad committed murder of Banshi Lal and thereafter they ran away towards graveyard. This incident was witnessed by Maseer Ahmad and his wife and son Juber Ahmad. Indrajeet Dubey took the body of Banshi Lal to his house for treatment but he had already died and then he ( Indra Jeet )went to the police station and lodged the report. On the basis of this report the police registered the case against the accused persons and started investigation.
The applicant has alleged that he is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in this case . Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the prosecution story is highly improbable . He contended that , according to the prosecution version, the F.I.R. was lodged at 7. 05 P.M. and thereafter entry was made in the G.D. and the statement of the informant was recorded and then proceeding of inquest was started at 8 P.M. It was further contended that the distance of police station from the place of occurrence is 12 Kms. and it was humanly impossible to reach that place within a period of one hour doing the aforesaid work. He again submitted that it again appears improbable that when the informant came to know that Banshi Lal had been murdered at the house of Masir Ahmad , he took his brother to his own house for treatment because there was no question of providing any treatment after he had died. He also submitted that there are three fire arm injuries as per the postmortem report , but there are only two assailants. He also submitted that the applicant was at Mumbai on the date of incident and was under the treatment of a Doctor at Mumbai. He has filed photostat copy of the Railway ticket which goes to show that the ticket was booked for journey on 12.12.04 from Mumbai to Allahabad by Bombay Calcutta Mail and this reservation was made on 10.12.04. A copy of the medical certificate has been filed to show that Mr. Sirajul Haq was under treatment of Dr. Satish G. Desai at Mumbai from 3.12.04 to 10.12.04.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail application . He submitted that in this case the accused had committed murder of Banshi Lal on 5.12.04 at 5.45 P.M. and there are eye witness of the incident as stated in the F.I.R. who had seen the accused firing at the deceased, and the evidence of alibi submitted by the accused requires proof and so no reliance should be placed on this evidence at this stage. He further submitted that , according to the site plan , blood was found in the house of Masir Ahmad by the I.O. and this fact of recovery of blood from his house supports the prosecution version and the informant who might have thought that he could save the life of his brother, carried his body for treatment. He submitted that the applicant has committed murder of the deceased in a pre-planned and cold blooded manner when he had been released on bail in the murder case of Hira Lal ( brother of the deceased )and, therefore , he does not deserve bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case , I am of the view that the applicant does not deserve bail. The application is rejected. However, the lower court shall try to conclude the trial expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and if trial is not concluded within the aforesaid period for no fault of the accused , the applicant would be at liberty to move a fresh bail application .
1.2.2006
MLK
Copyright
Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites
Advertisement
dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |
Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.
Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.