Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Mohd Azad @ Javed @ Mujjaffer Alam vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 5 January, 2018

            THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                      MCRC-23595-2017




                                                            sh
       (MOHD AZAD @ JAVED @ MUJJAFFER ALAM Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)




                                                      e
  5




                                                   ad
  Jabalpur, Dated : 05-01-2018

                                              Pr
  Shri Vikas Mahawar, counsel for petitioner Mohd. Azad @ Javed @
  Mujjaffer Alam.
                                      a
  Shri Vivek Mishra, Government Advocate for the respondent-State.

hy Heard on this second application for bail under section 439 of the Code ad of Criminal Procedure filed on behalf of petitioner Mohd Azad @ Javed M @ Mujjaffer Alam in Crime No.154/2016 registered by P.S. GRP, Gadarwara District Hoshangabad under Sections 328, 379 and 304 of of the Indian Penal Code.

rt His first application for same relief was dismissed as withdrawn by ou order dated 26.07.2017 passed in M.Cr.C.No. 10396/2017. As per the prosecution case, victim Gopal Das was traveling in general C coach of Pawan Express from Mumbai to Allahabad. On 07.07.2015 h between Railway Stations Pipariya and Jabalpur, some miscreants ig administered poison to him and looted a bag containing Rs.2500/- in H cash, clothes and documents from his possession. The next day, relatives of victim Gopal Das received him at Allahabad Railway Station and he was admitted for treatment at a hospital, where he died as a result of effects of poison. Later on, the present petitioner was caught by police and on the disclosure statement made by him under section 27 of the Evidence Act. The bag belonging to the victim containing his clothes and his domicile certificate was seized from the possession of the petitioner on 31.12.2016. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The first information report was lodged 15 months after the date of the incident i.e. on 03.10.2016. It is highly unlikely that someone would keep in his possession a damning piece of sh evidence like domicile certificate of the deceased even after about a year and a half of the incident. The petitioner has been in custody since e ad 31.12.2016. Therefore, it has been prayed that the petitioner be released on bail.

Pr Learned Government Advocate for the respondent/State on the other a hand has vehemently opposed the application mainly on the grounds hy that the petitioner is resident of Bihar and is at present residing in ad Delhi. It will be extremely difficult to procure his presence before the trial Court once he is released on bail. It has further been submitted M that the petitioner is a habitual offender and specializez in of administering poison to unsuspecting passengers in running trains and thereafter looting them. There are four such cases apart from the rt present one registered against him. In addition thereto, there are four ou cases of theft from train also registered against him. In the present C case, poisonous substance Thorn Apple (Dhatura) was administered to h the victim which had led to his death; therefore, it has been prayed that ig the petitioner be not released on bail. H Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case in their entirety, particularly the facts, as pointed out by learned Government Advocate for the respondent/State, in the opinion of this Court, the petitioner does not deserve to be released on bail. Consequently, this second application for bail under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, filed on behalf of petitioner Mohd Azad @ Javed @ Mujjaffer Alam, is also dismissed.

b ig h C ou rt of M ad hy a Pr ad e JUDGE sh (C V SIRPURKAR)