Court No. - 32
Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 144003 of 2017. In
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6785 of 2017 applicant :- Furkan @ Sumru Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for applicant :- Mohammad Fateh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties on the bail prayer of the applicant, who has been found guilty under section 302 of Indian Penal Code and 25 Arms Act and sentenced to various terms of imprisonment, maximum being life imprisonment. Fine has also been imposed.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submitted that the role of indiscriminate firing has been made against eight persons in the FIR, however, during the course of investigation, six persons were exonerated and charge sheet was filed only against the applicant and other co- accused. He further submitted that no specific role has been assigned to the applicant and general role has been assigned to all the accused including the applicant of firing. He further submitted that the witnesses of fact namely Hasan Ali, PW 1 and Mohammad Ali, PW 2 have not supported the prosecution story and were declared hostile. PW 3, Sher Mohammad has stated in his testimony that he reached the spot after the occurrence. Thus, he has also not supported the prosecution story and he too was declared hostile. He further submitted that false recovery of pistol was planted by the police in order to work out the case. He further submitted that false allegation has been made against the applicant and the evidence of witnesses of fact is not believable. He further submitted that there is no credible evidence against the applicant to show his complicity in the commission of the alleged offence. It is further submitted that if the accused-applicant is released on bail, he will never misuse the liberty of bail. He further submitted that there is no likelihood of early hearing of this appeal in near future. In last, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is in jail since 4.6.2013.
Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and supported the trial court's judgment. He further submitted that the applicant was specifically named in the FIR and according to report of the Ballistic Expert, the two empty cartridges found on the spot near the dead body of the deceased were fired from the pistol recovered at the pointing out of the applicant.
He further submitted that the PW 1 and PW 2 in their examination-in-chief have supported the prosecution case, however, in their cross- examination they have resiled from their earlier statement and did not support the prosecution story. He further submitted that the ocular version clearly corroborates the medical evidence.
Keeping in view the rival submissions as advanced by learned counsel for the parties, nature of the case, judgment and other materials available on record, we are of the view that the applicant should be released on bail.
Without going into the merits of the case, let the applicant namely Furkan @ Sumru convicted in S.T. No. 919 of 2013, Case Crime No. 168 of 2013, under Section 302 IPC and S.T. No. 923 of 2013, Case Crime No. 234 of 2013, under Section 25 Arms Act, Police Station Jani, District Meerut be released on bail during the pendency of appeal on executing a personal bond with two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.
The prayer for stay of realization of fine imposed upon the applicant is hereby refused.
On acceptance of bail bonds and personal bond, the lower court shall transmit photostat copies thereof to this Court for being kept on the record of this appeal.
The bail application is, accordingly, disposed of.
Order Date :- 29.5.2018 vinay