Interim Order 27

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF SHRI ANIL ANTIL; ASJ 04, PHC, NEW DELHI
SC No. 2/20
State Vs. Kasim Ansari & Ors.
FIR No. 300/19
PS: Naraina
U/s. 395/397/411/412/120B IPC
10.03.2022
Present: Sh S.K. Kain, Additional PP for the State.
Sh. Shakir Shabbir, Sh. Syed Bashar Afzal & Sh. Nirnay
Pratap Singh, Advocates for the applicant/accused
Taslim.
By virtue of filing the present application under Section
439 Cr. PC, the applicant/accused Taslim is seeking bail.
Reply to bail application filed by SI Yogesh Yadav, the
same be taken on record.
Arguments heard on the application from the learned
defence counsel as also from the learned Additional PP on behalf of
the State.
It has been argued by the learned defence counsel that
the applicant is innocent; he has nothing to do with the present case
and has been falsely implicated; that the applicant is the sole bread
earner of his family; that his step father has expired last year and that
he has his mother and younger sister to look after; that the applicant
is in J/C since 06.09.2019.
-- 1 of 5 --
It is further submitted that the charge sheet in the present
case has been filed and charge has been framed ; accused is not
required for the purpose of further investigation; that no recovery was
effected from his person and the recoveries as shown by the
prosecution are planted upon him.
It is submitted that complainant Smt. Sushma (PW1)
and Smt Zubeda (PW2 ) have already been examined; PW2 has
failed to identify the accused as one of the perpetrator of the
alleged case crime; that in fact PW2 has turned hostile and has
not supported the case of prosecution. That these were the only
two material witnesses who already stands examined in the court
and the remaining witnesses are police officials and therefore no
chance of the applicant/accused influencing or threatening the
witnesses.
It is further stated that the applicant belongs to a
respectable family, has clean antecedents and not involved in any
other case and no useful purpose would be served by keeping him
behind the bars for the unlimited period. It is further submitted
that the other coaccused persons similarly placed ( Shanu, Mohd.
Razi, Kasim Ansari & Fardeen Siddiqui @ Shamee ) have already
been admitted on regular bail.
Further, without stressing much on the merits, learned
counsel pleaded that the applicant has already spent a
considerable time in the custody and therefore a request is made
-- 2 of 5 --
to take lenient view, to ensure that the future of the applicant is not
spoiled by keeping him in the company of hardened criminal in
custody.
On the other hand, bail application is opposed by the
learned Addl. PP for the State mentioning that the
applicant/accused alonwith his co accused is involved into a
heinous and serious offence of committing the day light robbery ;
the trial of the case is at initial stage and other cited prosecution
witnesses are yet to be examined. However, during arguments, it
was fairly conceded by the prosecution that complainant Smt.
Sushma (PW1) and another eye witness Smt Zubeda (PW2) of
the prosecution have been examined and PW2 has not supported
the case of the prosecution nor identified the applicant.
It is however submitted that PW1 (complainant) has
identified the applicant as one of the persons who had committed
the case crime.
To refute the identification in the court, it is submitted
that PW1 has stated in her examination that “she has identified
the applicant from the dossier shown to her by the IO” therefore
her identification of the applicant in the court is also seriously
shrouded in the cloud.
Further, the learned Additional PP concedes that
applicant has clean antecedents, not involved to any other case
and therefore benefit of the same may be granted to him.
-- 3 of 5 --
Heard and record perused.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, taking note
of the custody period, his clean antecedents and additionally, two
material witnesses i.e. complainant and eye witness of the
prosecution have already been examined; it would take
considerable time in examination of other witnesses, who mostly
are police officials; additionally the fact that all other coaccused
persons have already admitted to regular, accordingly, the
application for seeking regular bail of applicant/accused Taslim is
allowed and he also is admitted to regular bail on his furnishing a
Personal Bond in the sum of Rs. 30,000/ with one surety of the
like amount subject to following conditions :
1. That the accused shall furnish mobile number, in his bail
bond and to the concerned IO/SHO against receipt, and the same
shall be kept operational at all times during the period of his bail so
that he can be contacted at any time.
2. That the accused shall not try to tamper with or influence any
prosecution witness in any manner whatsoever during the period
of his bail, in this case.
3. That the accused shall not indulge in any similar offence
while on bail.
4. that applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make any
inducement, threat or promise to the complainant or any person / witness
of the prosecution;
-- 4 of 5 --
5. that the applicant shall join the investigation as and when
required or so intimated by the IO through notice;
6. that in case he changes his mobile number or residential
address or work place, he shall inform the IO/SHO or to the learned
trial court forthwith;
Application stands disposed of accordingly.
Copy of the order be sent Superintendent Jail concerned for
information and compliance.
Copy of the order be also given dasti to the parties concerned
as prayed.
(Anil Antil)
ASJ04/NDD/PHC/ND
10.03.2022
-- 5 of 5 --