Delhi High Court - Orders
State vs Mohd. Gufran Alias Danish on 23 April, 2021
Author: Suresh Kumar Kait
Bench: Suresh Kumar Kait
$~11
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 886/2021 & CRL.M.A. 4434/2021
STATE ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Amit Mahajan & Mr. Rajat
Nair, Special Public Prosecutors
for State & Mr. Shantnu Sharma,
Advocate with Inspector Rajeev
Kumar Crime Branch
Versus
MOHD. GUFRAN alias DANISH ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Salman Khurshid, Senior
Advocate with Ms. Deeksha
Dwivedi and Mr. Zafar Khurshid,
Advocates
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT
ORDER
% 23.04.2021 The hearing has been conducted through video conferencing.
1. Petitioner /State is aggrieved of order dated 12.01.2021 passed by the learned trial court vide which respondent, who is accused in FIR No. 50/2020, registered at police station Jafrabad, Delhi for the offences under Sections 109/147/148/149/186/283/302/307/323/333/353/ 427/120B/34 IPC and Sections 25/27 Arms Act and Sections 3 & 4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, has been granted bail.
2. The present petition has been preferred on the ground that the CRL.M.C. 886/2021 Page 1 of 3 learned trial court has ignored the gravity of the offence and the specific role of petitioner in the commission of crime. It is stated that the respondent/accused was named in the disclosure statements of other accused persons, namely, Mohd. Gulfam, Akil @ Bona, Salman, Mehfooz Raza @ Kana, Mohd. Azad, Shahid, Mohd. Faizan, Rifaquat Ali and one CCL. Further stated that respondent is clearly seen in the video clips of the spot of the violent crowd and was further identified by SI Pankaj Kumar, whose statement was recorded on 28.03.2020. It is also submitted that the present accused/respondent has disclosed names of several rioters involved in the incident and they are still being identified and some of them have been arrested and some are still at large.
3. Lastly, it is submitted that the alleged incident did not happen in the spur of moment but happened because of deep rooted strategy/conspiracy and therefore, the order passed by the learned trial court deserves to be set aside.
4. Notice issued.
5. Ms. Deeksha Dwivedi, Advocate, accepts notice for respondent.
6. On a specific asking of this Court, learned Special Public Prosecutor for petitioner/State has played the video clipping of the alleged incident wherein respondent is seen. In the said video the respondent can be seen silently standing behind the crowd of mob wearing a t-shirt with his hands down. He is seen not possessing any arms and not doing any illegal activity which could be termed as instigating the mobs. In the opinion of this Court, there is no illegality or perversity in the observations made by the courts below.
7. The petition and pending application are accordingly dismissed, CRL.M.C. 886/2021 Page 2 of 3 while refraining to comment upon the merits of the case.
SURESH KUMAR KAIT, J APRIL 23, 2021 r CRL.M.C. 886/2021 Page 3 of 3