Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4897 of 2014 Appellant :- Nadeem Ahmad Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- I.M. Khan,Santosh Kumar Rai Counsel for Respondent :- Govt.Advocate,Sikandar B. Kochar Connected with Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4574 of 2014 Appellant :- Ahrar Ahmad Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Dileep Kumar,Rajrshi Gupta,Ram Surat Saroj Counsel for Respondent :- Govt.Advocate,Brijesh Sahai,Ganesh Shankar Dubey,Rajul Bhargava,Sikander B. Kocher
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
In Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 415734 of 2014 and 392703 of 2014
Heard Sri Rajrshi Gupta and Sri I. M. Khan, learned counsel appearing for the aforementioned appellants, Sri Sikandar B. Kochar, learned counsel for the complainant and Sri A.R. Chaurasia, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the appellants that appellants along with two unknown persons are said to have fired shots with their respective fire arm weapons upon the deceased, who received as many as three entry wounds, two exit wounds and two lacerated wounds on his person. It is stated that incident was of a blind murder and no one has witnessed the incident as firstly inquest report and the Panchnama was prepared thereafter the F.IR. was registered. It is stated that the FIR was ante-timed and there are manipulation in the G.D. entry and other police papers; that motive of the crime is also weak and so far as appellant Ahrar Ahmad is concerned there is no recovery of any weapon either from his possession or on his pointing and so far as appellant no.2 is concerned though a country-made pistol is said to have been recovered from his pointing out but weapon recovered did not match according to the ballistic report. The appellants are in jail about last 6 years since 03.11.2012.
Learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned AGA have opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the incident has occurred on 14.10.2012 at 5:00 p.m. and there is eye witness account of the incident; that the elder brother of the deceased as PW-1 and uncle of the deceased as PW-2 have witnessed the incident, who have supported the prosecution case. It is further stated that post mortem report corroborates the ocular testimony.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the submission advanced, we find no good ground for grant of bail to the appellants Ahrar Ahmad and Nadeem Ahmad convicted and sentenced in S.T. No. 104 of 2013 arising out of case crime no. 688 of 2012, under sections 302/34 I.P.C., police station Kotwali Nagar, District Bulandshahar.
Accordingly, the bail application are rejected.
The hearing of the appeals is expedited.
Office is directed to prepare the paper books within six months. List thereafter before the appropriate Bench for final hearing.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 30.10.2018 Imroz