Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43367 of 2018 Applicant :- Jafar Ahmad @ Jafru @ Jafruruddin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Bhishm Pal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Heard Sri Rajiv Lochan, Advocate holding brief of Sri Bhishm Pal Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant contends that applicant is not named in F.I.R. dated 21.6.2017 by which S.I. Dileep Kumar Singh lodged report regarding recovery of an unknown male body at about 4:30 p.m. on 21.6.2017 which was claimed to be that of driver Mushahid of Mahaveera Transport; that on very next day 22.6.2017 recovery of a looted truck loaded with tyres was made from joint possession of applicant and two others with recovery of unauthorized knives recording their confessional statements about loot of truck and throwing away the body of driver after strangulating him; that above recovery has been falsely planted of which there is no independent witness; that applicant had no concern with deceased Mushahid and did neither commit any loot of truck in question nor commit death of Mushahid; that confessional statement in police custody is not admissible in evidence; that as per post- mortem report of deceased prepared on 22.6.2017 the dead body was badly decomposed and upon autopsy cause of death could not be ascertained but it was opined by Medical Officer that death would have taken about 2 weeks ago meaning thereby on or about 8.6.2017; that according to evidence on record the deceased was missing with truck from 17.6.2017 and would have been murdered between 17.6.2017 and 21.6.2017 but post-mortem report is in contradiction to above; that at the time of recovery of truck certain papers were also recovered from truck suggesting delivery at TCC Godown, Sindhrawali and dispatch date 12.6.2017; that applicant never made a call to deceased by his mobile phones no.9541411010 & 9812035836; that contention so made on behalf of co-accused Sharuf Khan is misconceived; that in this case based on circumstantial evidence there is no incriminating evidence against applicant; that applicant has no criminal history; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 19.8.2017.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and contended that applicant has been arrested with recovery of looted truck of which deceased was a driver having been murdered by applicant and his associates for committing loot; that applicant has confessed about the incident in question; that bail application of co-accused Sharuf Khan has been rejected.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Jafar Ahmad @ Jafru @ Jafruruddin be released on bail in Case Crime No.278 of 2017, under Sections 302, 201, 394, 404, 411, 120-B I.P.C., P.S. Jewar, District Gautam Budh Nagar, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
Order Date :- 20.12.2018 Kpy