In a bail application under Section 302 IPC, the High Court rejected the plea due to the accused specific role, witness testimony assigning active participation, and recovery of incriminating articles at the applicant pointing.
The bail application was rejected; the applicant must face trial as no case for bail was made out.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34088 of 2020
Applicant :- Riyaz Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Renu Singh,Lav Srivastava,Vinod Prakash Srivastava (Senior Adv.) Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Sri V.P.Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. Renu Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.
The applicant is facing prosecution in connection with S.T. No. 421 of 2019, State Vs. Yameen and others, arising out of case crime no. 324 of 2019, under Section 302 IPC, P.S. Khurja Nagar, District Bulandshahar. The applicant is in jail since 18.05.2019.
Submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant is that Mohd. Shadab has lodged the prompt FIR dated 26.05.2019 itself for the incident said to have been taken place on 19.45 p.m. of which the FIR came into existence on 22.27 p.m. at police station Khurja Nagar and was lodged under Section 302 IPC against four named accused persons including the present applicant Riyaz.
Learned Senior counsel states that out of named accused persons Hashim and Yameen were admitted on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court. The bail order is annexed as Annexure No.10 to the application. In those bail orders while admitting the bail to co-accused persons Hashim & Yameen has clearly distinguished the case of the present applicant.
The text of the FIR runs as that informant's younger brother Javed was
having a tender relation with one Shahleen d/o Mohd. Yameen. There was a Panchayat between the family and Shahleen was got married at Sikandarabad. However, the family members of Shahleen used to accused Javed to disturb the peaceful marital live of Shahleen and they used to threaten him. On the fateful day on 26.05.2019 at 7.45 p.m., Yameen, father of Shahleen, Riyaz-uncle, cousin-Mantu, Hashim and the applicant came to informant's factory, J.K.Engineering works where the informant with Javed younger brother Parvez and watchman Chaman were present. There were certain hot talks were going on, all of sudden at the instance of Yameen, Mantu, Hashim and Riyaz(the applicant) has given a singular fatal shot on the head of Javed by his 'tamancha' and ran away from their motorcycle. For this incident an prompt FIR was got registered attributing the sole role causing fatal injury to present applicant Riyaz by the informant Mohd.Shamshad.
Sri V.P.Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel has drawn the attention of the Court raising number of technical issues, namely, Annexure No.-2, letter of Kailash Hospital, it has been mentioned that the dead body was brought by S.I.-Bachchoo Singh, whereby it has been mentioned that 'some unknown person' has given a fatal firearm shot upon head of Javed. Learned Senior counsel has further drawn the attention of the Court to the Annexure No.-3 is the G.D.Entry dated 26.05.2019 at 21.27 p.m. in which it has been mentioned that after getting the information from the hospital, it has been mentioned that Kailash Hospital, the death was reported of one Javed son of Yameen by the firearm. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that there was not mentioned any name of any assailant. It has also been contended that statement 161 Cr.P.C. of eye witness Parvej was recorded in C.D. Parcha No.8 on 28.06.2019 in which he has mentioned that Riyaz has given a fatal blow on the head of
deceased Javed but in the inquest report it did not utter a single word regarding the name of the assailant though he has put his signature as one of the Panch. From all these, learned Senior counsel try to impress upon the court that name of the applicant has been inserted lateron after the consultation.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application by mentioning that FIR was got registered within five hours of the incident, whereas the police station is hardly 3 kms. away from the place of incident. During this period they have taken away the deceased to the Kailash Hospital and Bachchoo Singh, S.I. might have given the information that some anonymous persons fired upon the deceased causing his death. The alleged fallacy in the investigation would not deter or adversely affect the merit of the case, when the FIR was promptly registered specifying the role of the assailant. Not only this during investigation there was recovery of countrymade pistol with the cartridge used in the commission of offence at the pointing out of Riyaz himself.
After assessing the overall scenario of the case where their is specific role has been attributed to the present applicant for causing fatal injury to the applicant, Parvej who is an eye-witness in his 161 Cr.P.C. statement assigns the active role to the applicant for causing the brutal murder of the deceased coupled with the fact that the recovery of alleged 'Tamancha' and its cartridges was recovered at the pointing out of the applicant. In totality of the circumstances if evaluated, no case for bail is made out for the applicant, accordingly the present bail application is hereby rejected.
It is also given to understand that S.T No. 421 of 2019 is pending before learned trial court, it is expected from the learned trial court to gear up the
trial and decide the same on priority basis, provided the applicant and prosecution render fullest support and cooperation in the early conclusion
of the trial without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the
parties.
04.11.2020
Order Date :- 4.11.2020 Abhishek Sri./M.Kumar
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the factual appraisal of the case inspires confidence to grant bail to the applicant charged with murder.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Riyaz
Rahul Chaturvedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
