Delhi High Court - Orders
State Govt Of Nct Of Delhi vs Tariq Ahmad Dar & Ors on 24 November, 2022
Author: Mukta Gupta
Bench: Mukta Gupta
$~3
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.L.P. 406/2017
STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Petitioner
Represented by: Mr. Prithu Garg, APP for State
with Insp. Sanjeev, PS Spl. Cell.
versus
TARIQ AHMAD DAR & ORS ..... Respondent
Represented by: Mr. Satish Tamta, Sr. Adv. with
Ms. Nisha Narayanan, Mr. Shariq
Iqbal, Advs. for R-1.
Mr. Sushil Bajaj, Adv. for R-2.
Mr. Bhavook Chauhan, Mr. Harsh
Bora, Mr. Chinmay Kanojia, Mr.
Tushar Yadav, Advs. for R-3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL
ORDER
% 24.11.2022 CRL.M.A. 11586/2017
1. By this application the State seeks condonation of delay of 63 days in filing the leave to appeal petition.
2. Considering the facts stated in the application, delay of 63 days in filing the leave to appeal petition is condoned.
3. Application is disposed of.
CRL.L.P. 406/20171. We have gone through the evidence of PW-14 the witness who boarded the bus and claims that he had confrontation with respondent Mohd. Rafiq Shah while he wanted to sit next to him and that subsequently he sat on the side seat and left the bag with the co-passenger Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ANIL KUMAR BHATT Signing Date:25.11.2022 17:02:38 on the pretext that he has to buy the ticket and thereafter did not turn up. When after two minutes Mohd. Rafiq Shah did not turn up, they found that the passenger was not in the bus, they opened the bag and found there were wires in it and the voice of tik-tok was coming from the same. Thereafter, the driver drove the bus to a side and threw the bag at an open place in between the road and the Jal Board Office where the blast took place. Though PW-14 is the only witness who has identified the respondent Mohd. Rafiq Shah, however his version is duly corroborated by the other injured witnesses as also the driver and conductor of the bus.
2. The plea of Mohd. Rafiq Shah is that he was a student of Kashmir University and DW-2 and DW-3 have stated that on the fateful day the presence of Mohd. Rafiq Shah is marked in the class. None of these witnesses claim that they personally saw the respondent, except stating that whenever a student is present it is marked as 'P' and on the absence a dot is put. The role attributed to the other two respondents is of conspiracy. Considering the evidence on record, this Court finds it to be a fit case for grant of leave to appeal to the State.
3. Consequently, the petition is disposed of granting leave to appeal to the State.
CRL.A.___________/2022 (Register to number the appeal)
1. Admit.
2. Trial Court Record has been received.
3. By the impugned judgment respondent No.1/Tariq Ahmad Dar has been convicted for offence punishable under Section 38 & 39 of UAPA and he has already filed an appeal challenging the said conviction.
4. This appeal will be heard along with CRL.A.369/2017 filed by Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ANIL KUMAR BHATT Signing Date:25.11.2022 17:02:38 Tariq Ahmad Dar against his conviction under Section 38 & 39 of UAPA in FIR No. 1120/2005 registered at PS Kalkaji.
5. Pending decision in the appeal, the respondents will furnish a personal bond in the sum of ₹25,000/- each with one surety bond each of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the Joint Registrar (Judicial) of this Court within six weeks. The personal bond will indicate the permanent and the temporary residential address of the respondents as also the mobile phone number to be used by them during this period. The mobile phone will be kept in active mode during the pendency of the appeal so that as and when required the respondents can be contacted. Further, in case of change of residential address and/or the mobile phone number, the same will be intimated to this Court by way of an affidavit.
6. Learned counsel for Tariq Ahmad Dar states that he is in custody.
7. Superintendent Tihar Jail is directed to produce Tariq Ahmad Dar in this Court before the Joint Registrar (Judicial) for furnishing the personal bond and surety bond on 6th December, 2022.
8. The other two respondents would be at liberty to furnish personal bond and surety bond within six weeks.
9. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
ANISH DAYAL, J.
NOVEMBER 24, 2022 'ga' Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ANIL KUMAR BHATT Signing Date:25.11.2022 17:02:38