Uttarakhand High Court
Rizwan vs State Of Uttarakhand on 27 July, 2020
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2020 UTR 407
Author: Alok Kumar Verma
Bench: Alok Kumar Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
First Bail Application No.963 of 2020
Rizwan ....Applicant
Vs.
State of Uttarakhand ......Respondent
With
First Bail Application No.1096 of 2020
Ashu alias Mohd. Ashar ....Applicant
Vs.
State of Uttarakhand ......Respondent
Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma, J.
These two bail applications have been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in connection with FIR No.0149 of 2020, registered with Police Station Sitargarnj, District Udham Singh Nagar for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148,149, 307, 452, 506, 323, 427, 188, 269 of the I.P.C. and Section 51(b) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005.
2. An FIR was registered on 12.05.2020 at 19.35 hrs. against the present applicants along with other named seven co- accused persons and 60-70 unnamed persons on the basis of a written report lodged by the informant-Smt. Premwati, alleging in it that on 12.05.2020 at about 10 a.m., Inder Ram, son of the informant, went to cut scrap. He had altercation with Uves and Anil Kumar. Inder Ram came back to his house. Around 4.30 p.m. on the same day i.e. 12.05.2020, the present applicants along with other named co- accused persons and unnamed persons came to her house carrying 2 with Swords, Knives, Sticks, Tamanchas and Rifles and fired upon her son. Her son received gunshot injury on his chest. They tried to kill her son. All these persons also assaulted whoever they met in the way with sticks and swords in which Yashpal, Mohan Swaroop, Bablu and Premwati received injuries. They also committed marpeet with other villagers and broke their belongings after entering their houses.
3. Heard Mr. Abhishek Verma the learned counsel appearing for the applicant-Rizwan and Mr. S.R.S. Gill, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant-Ashu alias Mohd. Ashar and Mr. S.S. Adhikari, the learned A.G.A. assisted by Mr. P.S. Uniyal, the learned Brief Holder for the State through video conferencing.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the applicants submit that the applicants have been falsely implicated; they have not committed the alleged offences; nothing has been recovered from the applicant-Rizwan; the applicant-Ashu alias Mohd. Ashar was arrested on 15.05.2020 and thereafter, recovery of one wooden stick was shown from the applicant-Ashu; the said wooden stick is easily available in the market; the co-accused Anil and Uves have a fish pond on lease; the alleged injured was taking away fish from their pond by theft; on which an altercation took between them; thereafter, this false case was lodged against number of persons including the present applicants; the evidence, collected during the investigation so far does not disclose any motive or intention of the applicants for the purpose of causing death of the injured; the applicants are the resident of District Udham Singh Nagar; the applicant-Rizwan is in custody since 23.05.2020 and the applicant-Ashu is in custody since 15.05.2020.
5. The State has not submitted any written submission against the bail applications, however, the learned A.G.A. appearing for the State opposed the bail applications orally.
36. Bail is the rule and the committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the investigation is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused.
7. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no reason to keep the applicants behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicants deserve bail at this stage.
8. The bail applications are allowed.
9. Let the applicants be released on bail on their executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the condition that the applicants shall appear themselves before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when requires.
10. It is clarified that if the applicants misuse or violate the condition, imposed upon them, the Investigating Officer will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.
(Alok Kumar Verma, J.) 27.07.2020 JKJ/Neha