Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Bablu Sharma vs Union Territory Of J&K on 29 January, 2021
Author: Rajnesh Oswal
Bench: Rajnesh Oswal
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
ATJAMMU
(Through Video Conference)
Reserved on : 19.01.2021
Pronounced on: 29.01.2021
Bail App. No. 129/2020
CrlM No. 728/2020
Bablu Sharma .....Petitioner/Applicant(s)
Through :- Mr. Pawan Kumar Khajuria, Advocate
v/s
Union Territory of J&K .....Respondent(s)
Through :- Mr. Aseem Sawhney, AAG Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE
(through Video Conference from High Court, Jammu) Judgment
1. The present application has been filed by the petitioner seeking bail in FIR No. 32/2020 of Police Station, Katra, Reasi for commission of offences under sections 307, 341, 323, 147, 382, 120-B IPC and 4/25 Arms Act after his application for grant of bail was rejected by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Reasi (hereinafter to be referred as the trial court) on 13.06.2020.
2. The petitioner is seeking bail on the ground that he figures as an accused in the challan, titled, "Union Territory of J&K vs. Deepak Kumar and others" arising out of FIR (supra) registered on 19.02.2020 and on the same day, the petitioner was arrested in the abovementioned FIR. After the 2 Bail App. No. 129/2020 conclusion of investigation, the challan stands filed before the trial court during the lockdown in the month of April, 2020. It is further stated that due to COVID-19 pandemic, charges have not been framed and the petitioner has been in custody for the last 11 months without trial. It is further stated that the petitioner is suffering from immune deficiency disease and this fact came to his knowledge when he was admitted in GMCH Jammu vide MRD No. 987950 dated 27.02.2020. It is also submitted that he wants to get himself treated outside the State and needs proper care.
3. The respondent-Union Territory has filed the objections, in which the respondent has opposed the bail application on the ground that the offence committed by the petitioner is heinous in nature and in order to restore the confidence of general public in the administration of justice, the present bail application deserves to be dismissed.
4. Mr. Pawan Kumar Khajuria, learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that the petitioner has already undergone custody for more more than 11 months and there is no likelihood of completion of trial in near future due to restricted functioning of the courts due to COVID-19 pandemic and also that the presence of the petitioner is required for the purpose of trial only as the challan stands filed.
5. On the contrary, Mr. Aseem Sawhney, learned AAG has reiterated the grounds those have been raised in the objections filed by him. Mr. Sawhney has vehemently argued that the petitioner may temper with the prosecution evidence and influence the prosecution witnesses.
6. Heard and considered the rival submissions.
3 Bail App. No. 129/2020
7. The brief resume of the prosecution story is that on 19.02.2020 an information was received from reliable sources at Police Station, Katra at 12:45 hours that the accused namely, Deepak Kumar, Bablu Sharma (petitioner), Rinku Sharma, and Sanjay Kumar in connivance with one Om Parkash attacked Sunil Sharma (victim) at Bus Stand, Katra and critically injured him. FIR was registered on the basis of said information and during the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer took the injured from the spot to CHC, Katra for treatment and during the course of investigation, site plan was prepared. Statement of eye witnesses under section 164 Cr.P.C. as well as other witnesses under section 161 Cr.P.C, were recorded. After the conclusion of investigation, the challan for commission of offences mentioned above was filed against all the accused. Investigating Officer has also recovered one sword toka and two iron darats pursuant to the disclosure statements of four accused.
8. Admittedly, the challan against the petitioner stands filed and it is also not disputed by the respondent that the petitioner has been suffering from immuno deficiency disease as mentioned in the instant bail application. The petitioner was arrested on 19.02.2020 and till date he has been in continuous custody. No doubt the allegations leveled against the petitioner are serious in nature but the fact remains that the challan stands filed against the petitioner and other co-accused and the presence of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation but only during the trial and also that he has been in custody for the last more than 11 months. The allegations against the petitioner are subject to proof during the course of trial.
9. This is also true that all the courts are functioning in restricted mode and taking into consideration that the petitioner has been in custody for 4 Bail App. No. 129/2020 the last more than 11 months, also that he is suffering from immune deficiency disease and the conclusion of the trial may take time, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner deserves to be enlarged on bail. Apprehension expressed by the learned AAG that the petitioner may influence the witnesses can be taken care of by imposing appropriate conditions while granting the bail.
10. For all what has been discussed above, this application is allowed. The petitioner is enlarged on bail on the following conditions:
(i) subject to furnishing of personal bond and bail bond to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- each along with two sureties to the like amount each to the satisfaction of the trial court.
(ii) he shall furnish an undertaking that he shall not leave the territory of U.T of J&K without the permission of the trial court.
(iii) he shall not contact with any of the prosecution witnesses during the trial and shall regularly appear before the trial court.
11. In the event of violation of any of the conditions mentioned above, the respondent can lay a motion for cancellation of bail of the petitioner before the trial Court.
12. Disposed of accordingly.
(RAJNESH OSWAL) JUDGE Jammu:
29.01.2021 Rakesh Whether the order is speaking: Yes Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No RAKESH KUMAR 2021.01.29 16:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document