Allahabad High Court
Dilshad @ Dilla vs State Of U.P. on 9 May, 2018
Bench: Rajul Bhargava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24524 of 2017
Applicant :- Dilshad @ Dilla
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mrityunjay Dwivedi,Gavendra Pal Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri Mehul Khare, learned counsel for the applicant and Mrs. Archana Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Dilshad @ Dilla in Case Crime No.130 of 2016, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 34, 120-B and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Chharra, District-Aligarh with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that according to the allegations made in the F.I.R. the incident is stated to have taken place on 27.7.2016 at 10 p.m. in which six accused including the applicant have been nominated and general role of firing by Katta and guns was attributed to all the accused. During investigation, the statements of first informant and eye-witnesses were recorded in which they have reiterated the version of the F.I.R. and the allegations against all the accused is general without any specification. He has next argued that four accused persons, namely, Mainuddin, Mamua, Meraj and Chhote Khan who were also attributed general role of firing, have been granted bail in Criminal Misc.Bail Application Nos.4518 of 2017, 15587 of 2017, 20480 of 2017 and 41119 of 2016, vide orders dated 1.3.2017, 2.5.2017, 9.3.2017 and 5.6.2017. He has further argued that distinguishable feature so far as the applicant is concerned, is that according to Ballistic Expert, the cartridge which was recovered from the spot tallied with the SBBL gun recovered from his possession after one month of the incident. He has next submitted that in the post mortem report multiple pellet injuries in big area has been noted which indicates that the injuries sustained by the deceased could have been caused by other accused who were also armed with firearms. Therefore, at this stage, merely because of the fact that one cartridge tallied with the SBBL gun recovered from the possession of applicant, he cannot be kept in incarceration in jail for a long period. There is no early prospect of conclusion of trial. So, the applicant, who is in jail since 22.08.2016, having no criminal history to his credit, deserves to be released on bail.
Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submitted that the empty cartridge recovered from the spot tallied with the gun recovered from the applicant but she could not dispute that the firearm injuries sustained by the deceased could be result of firing made by other accused as well.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant-Dilshad @ Dilla be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions that:-
1.The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;
2.The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;
3.The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the courts below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 9.5.2018
MN/-
