Madhya Pradesh High Court
Akash Jain vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 30 November, 2019
Author: Shailendra Shukla
Bench: Shailendra Shukla
1 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE M.Cr.C. No.36736 of 2019 (Akash Jain vs. State of MP) Indore, dated : 30.11.2019 Shri Sanjay Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Nilesh Patel, learned Public Prosecutor for the non- applicant - State.
Shri Ashutosh Surana, learned counsel for the objector. Heard. Perused the case diary.
This is first application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. Applicant - Akash Jain S/o Rajesh Jain is implicated in Crime No.761/2018 registered at Police Station - Station Road, Ratlam District Ratlam for the offence punishable under Section 294, 341, 147, 148 and 302 of IPC along with 4 of the Arms Act and he is in custody since 30.12.2018.
Accusation against the applicant is of stabbing Ifraz to death at Raltam in the night of 27.12.2018. The deceased along with two other persons was going on a motorcycle and they were overtaken by four persons who came from behind in two motorcycles and got down from their motorcycles and applicant then stabbed Ifraz.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that charge-sheet has since been filed against five accused persons including the present applicant, four of whom have been granted bail.
In this matter, FSL report had been sought and the same is available in which it has been shown that shirt and knife which was seized from the possession of the applicant contained human 2 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE M.Cr.C. No.36736 of 2019 (Akash Jain vs. State of MP) blood and there is DNA matching of the blood of the deceased with the blood found on these two items.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this FSL report is unreliable because there is no draft letter containing factum of sending these items to the FSL, that the FSL scientist is partisan and he had observed that many of the items such as soil, trousers, lower, pant-shirt, vest etc. are not being subjected to scientific tests because it has already been found proved that the accused had committed the offence. He further submits that the role of the FSL technician was to simply conduct scientific test on the seized items and it was not required for the scientist to refrain from test on the ground that accused had already been found to be involved in committing the offence. It has also been stated that FIR was lodged in the name of unknown persons and FIR was recorded belatedly. He has also submitted that two eye- witnesses namely, Shadab Qureshi and Surendra Singh have although in their statements recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. have implicated the present applicant and other co- accused persons but in their subsequent statements recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. no such implication has been made and he ultimately submits that other co-accused persons having been granted bail, same relief be granted to the present applicant as well.
Learned counsel for the objector has pointed out that apart from two eye-witnesses, there are other eye-witnesses namely, 3 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE M.Cr.C. No.36736 of 2019 (Akash Jain vs. State of MP) Iftiyaz, Afzal and Mehrum who have stated to have seen the applicant stabbing the deceased. Further, it has been pointed out that test identification parade has been carried out in which the applicant has been identified.
Learned Public Prosecutor for the State was also heard who has pointed out that co-accused Rakesh Singhad has been granted bail as he had not inflicted fatal blows on the deceased.
Considered rival contentions.
The FSL report is based on DNA matching which is an accurate scientific method of screening and in conducting such scientific investigation, human intervention is not required and chances to manipulate the figures by any unscrupulous element are minimal. Apart from this report, there are eye-witnesses namely, Iftiyaz, Afzal and Mehrum etc. The case of the applicant is distinguishable from that of co-accused Rakesh Singhad.
On due consideration of the aforesaid and looking to the seriousness of the offence so also FSL report and other related documents such as eye-witness's account as reflected in statements made under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., no case for grant of bail, as prayed, is made out. This application stands dismissed accordingly.
(Shailendra Shukla) Judge gp Digitally signed by Geeta Pramod Date: 2019.11.30 18:53:18 +05'30'