Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2866 of 2021 Applicant :- Mauhlat Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Damodar Singh,Devendra Vikram Singh,Sanjay Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Krishna Gopal
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State, learned counsel appearing on behalf of informant and perused the record of the case.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 769 of 2019, under Section 302, Police Station-Fareedpur, District- Bareilly, during the pendency of trial.
As per the prosecution case in brief, informant Sharif Khan, who is son of the deceased Haji Nanhe Khan has lodged F.I.R. on 18.11.2019 at 18:22 O'clock regarding an incident which took on the same day i.e. 18.11.2019 at 16:00 O'clock against four accused persons, namely, Daulat Khan, Mauhlat Khan (applicant), Irshad Khan and Rehmat Khan alleging inter alia that the accused persons arms with country made pistols surrounded his father from all side and with an intention to kill fired at him from their country made pistols. The fire shot of co-accused Daulat Khan and the applicant Mauhlat Khan hit to his father (deceased Haji Nanhe Khan) at his chest and abdomen, whereby he died at the spot. F.I.R. further alleges that when his aunt Apsari Begum came at the spot to save his father, co-accused Rehmat Khan also fired shot at Apsari Begum, which hit to her abdomen, who also died on the next day during her treatment. It is also the case of the prosecution that Shahjahan (wife of the deceased), Hakik Khan (son of the deceased), Gul Khan and informant are the eye witnesses of the incident.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that in fact on 18.11.2019 at about 4:00 p.m. four persons of the prosecution side assaulted Mohabbat Khan (son of co-accused Daulat Khan) by lathi, danda and iron rod, but F.I.R. about the said incident was lodged after much delay on 27.12.2019 against four persons including informant/complainant of this case, namely, Qayum Khan, Shrif Khan, Hakik Khan and Gul Khan as Case Crime No. 0841 of 2019, under Section 452, 307, 308, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. It is pointed out that in the said incident Mohabbat Khan received grievous head injury as his parietal bone was found fractured. It is next submitted that the prosecution side was aggressor in the incident, therefore applicant has exercised his right of private defence. The co-accused Irshad has been granted bail vide order dated 14.10.2020. It is next submitted that the informant is not an eye- witness, therefore, no reliance can be placed on the prosecution version. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit and is in jail since 26.11.2019. If the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the incident was seen by Smt. Shahjahan (wife of deceased Haji Nanhe Khan), Hakik Khan (son of deceased Haji Nanhe Khan) and Gul Khan and informant Sharif Khan. It is also submitted that during investigation on 19.11.2019, one country made pistol along with three live cartridges has been recovered on the pointing out of co-accused Daulat Khan and one country made pistol along with one live and one empty cartridge has been recovered on the pointing out of the applicant on 06.12.2019. It is further submitted that it is a case of double murder by the accused persons. The offence is heinous in nature. The prosecution case is fully corroborated with the injuries found on the body of the deceased. The plea of right of self defence is a matter of trial, therefore, bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected.
After having heard learned counsel for the parties, I find that there is specific allegation against the present applicant Mauhlat Khan and co-accused Daulat Khan to cause fire arm injury to deceased Haji Nanhe Khan. As per the prosecution case fire shot of the applicant and co-accused Daulat Khan hit to decease at his abdomen and chest. On perusal of post-mortem report of deceased Haji Nanhe Khan I also find that two fire arm wounds of entry have been found on chest and abdomen of the deceased and two bullets have also been found inside the body of the deceased Haji Nanhe Khan, which is fully corroborated with the prosecution case. So far as another deceased Apsari Begum is concerned, I find that as per her post-mortem report two fire arm wounds of entry and two fire arm wounds of exit have been found on her body, which also corroborate the prosecution case. In the F.I.R. specific role of shooting has been assigned to the applicant, co- accused Daulat Khan as well as Rehmat Khan. The case of present applicant is distinguishable from the case of co-accused Irshad. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation, gravity of offence and complicity of the applicant, I do not find any good ground to enlarge the applicant on bail.
Accordingly, the application for bail of applicant is rejected.
Order Date :- 7.10.2021 Sunil Kr. Gupta