Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36554 of 2018 Applicant :- Mohd. Jameel Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Arshad Hamid,Shri Kamal Krishna Senior Advocate,Zaid Arshad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record.
Heard Sri Kamal Krishna, learned Senior counsel assisted by Sri Zaid Arshad, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated due to enmity; that as per averments made in F.I.R. there was property dispute of the house between the deceased and accused persons as accused persons were willing to purchase the house of deceased and deceased was not ready to sell it; that the house in question of deceased previously belonged to Munnavar, the uncle-in-law of the deceased, who had received advance sale consideration of Rs.50,000/- from co-accused Girish Kushwaha and despite this he transferred the house in favour of Raju, the deceased and so the accused were allegedly pressing Raju to sell the house in question in favour of co-accused Girish Kushwaha; that it is wrong to say that applicant ever threatened the deceased for transfer of house or committed any mar-pit with him on 13.11.2017 or after causing fatal injuries thrown him by the side of railway track to make the evidence of crime disappear; that first informant is not the eye witness of the incident and the allegation that deceased informed him about the incident about 20 minutes before death on mobile phone have been falsely concocted; that no call is alleged to have been made by the deceased on mobile number of first informant as mentioned in the F.I.R.; that regarding the incident dated 13.11.2017 the statements of witnesses Mohd. Tariq and Zamil Ahmad have been recorded with inordinate delay on 20.4.2018, copy at Annexure-5, wherein it has been stated that accused had threatened the deceased while after a period of more than six months of incident statements of Ahmad Ali and Mohd. Yaqoob were also recorded on 26.5.2018, copy at Annexure-6 to the same effect; that on the same day i.e. on 26.5.2018 statement of Mohd. Shamim was also recorded, who alleges to have seen the deceased in the company of accused persons whereafter he got the information about murder of Raju; that the alleged evidence of last seeing in the highly belated statement of Mohd. Shamim is an afterthought and is not admissible against the applicant; that the applicant had no motive and was not the prospective vendee of the house in question; that the case of applicant is distinguishable from Girish Kushwaha, the prospective vendee of house in question; that the applicant has no criminal history; that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that the applicant is in custody since 17.5.2018.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of bail.
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 Mohd. Jameel be released on bail in Case Crime No.592 of 2017, under Section 302 I.P.C., P.S. Ghoorpur, District Allahabad, 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 :- 28.11.2018 Kpy