Court No. - 60
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45138 of 2018 Applicant :- Jamaluddin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sudeep Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Vakalatnama filed by Sri Faheem Ahmad, Advocate on behalf of the complainant is accepted and taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Faheem Ahmad, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the material brought on record.
By way of the instant application, the applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.127 of 2015, under Sections - 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 I.P.C., Police Station - Nizamabad, District - Azamgarh.
Contention has been raised by the counsel for the applicant is that the FIR version is not supported on practical grounds. Virtually no sale deed was ever executed of the land of the applicant. Applicant is neither vendor nor informant is the vendee.
Mutation proceeding is underway, wherein objection has been raised by the applicant.
In this case, initially the case was investigated into and final report was submitted, whereupon an application was moved for further investigation, which was allowed and thereafter charge sheet was filed. The FIR itself is vague, it does not indicate the preciseness as to who are the witnesses and before whom the wrongful act was done.
Applicant is very old person over around 75 years of age and he is suffering from various ailments and the papers pertaining to his health have been placed on record vide Annexure No.11 filed in support of the bail application.
It is admitted fact that the applicant himself is the owner of the property in question and the mutation proceeding is going on wherein the applicant has put in appearance and has raised objection, however he has not lodged any FIR.
The name of the informant had already been mutated in the year 2007. Till then, the informant and his brother were in possession of the property in question. Later on, because of the mischievous act of the applicant, the property was deliberately sold out to another person knowing it well that prior sale deed of the same property has been executed in favour of the informant.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that deliberate wrongful act has been done by the applicant.
Considering the submission so raised, considering the facts and also considering the accusation and the enormity of the offence, no good ground is made out for bail.
Accordingly, the instant bail applicant is rejected, at this stage.
Observation made in the body of this bail application shall have no bearing on the merit of the case.
Order Date :- 27.11.2018 S Rawat