Order 3

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 1
IA No. 01/2024
SC No. 137/2024
FIR No. 782/2023
State Vs. Azharuddin @ Ajju
(applicant/accused Azruddin/Ajju).
P.S. Welcome
u/s 307/323/341/452/506/34 IPC.
18.04.2024
Present : Sh. Parmod Kumar, Ld. Addl. PP for State.
None for applicant/accused.
This application under Section 439 Cr. PC seeking
regular bail moved on behalf of applicant, is fixed for clarification,
if any / order.
No clarification is required.
O R D E R
1. By virtue of this order, application u/s 439 Cr. PC on
behalf of applicant/accused seeking regular bail shall be
disposed of.
2. Ld. Counsel for applicant/accused has submitted that
applicant/accused has been falsely implicated in the present
case; that charge-sheet in the present case has already been
filed and applicant/accused is no more required for any
custodial interrogation; that applicant/accused is in JC since
07.11.2023; that there is delay of about 3 days in registering
the FIR. It has been further submitted that applicant/accused
is ready to abide by all the conditions imposed by the court,
if he is released on bail. Thus, Ld. Counsel has prayed for
grant of bail to the applicant/accused.
-- 1 of 5 --
2
3. Per contra, Ld. Addl. PP for State has opposed the
present application by referring to the serious nature of
allegations against applicant, as per which, he along with one
co-accused fired two bullets towards complainant’s wife,
however, she and her children narrowly escaped; that as per
the CCTV footage available on record, pistol and firing are
clearly visible; that applicant has been specifically named by
complainant’s wife as the offender, who along with his
associate fired upon her; that weapon of offence i.e. pistol
and two blank cartridges have also been recovered at the
instance of applicant/accused. It has thus been prayed that
bail application may be dismissed.
4. I have heard respective submissions made on behalf of
both sides and perused the material available on record.
5. In brief, the prosecution case is that on 01.10.2023, a
DD No. 84A w.r.t. quarrel was received at P.S. Welcome and
upon receipt of same, IO/SI Ankur Malik, HC Nazim and Ct.
Amit reached at the spot; IO collected the MLCs of
complainant, Aas Mohd., Shahadat, Noman, and Ramjan;
that on 03.10.2023 complainant came to P.S. and got
recorded his statement/complaint, wherein he submitted that
on 01.10.2023 at about 7.00 pm, he along with his elder
brother Ramjan were standing in front-gate of their house,
one Kesh s/o Kayyum, who was residing in the same gali,
came on his bullet motorcycle in high speed and his
motorycle was about to hit the son of complainant, who was
playing with his friends in the gali; that complainant asked
the accused that गलल मम ममटरससइककल आरसम सस चलसयस करम,
-- 2 of 5 --
3
upon which, accused Kesh got angry and went away while
abusing and threatening the complainant; that complainant
called at 112 number and after some time, accused Kesh,
Afzal @ Billu and Nadeem came with dandas and iron rods
in their hands and attacked the complainant, his brother and
his nephew and beat them up with danda and iron rods; that
thereafter, they all fled away from the spot; that police
reached at the spot and took the complainant as well as
injured persons to hospital for medical examination; that
after some time, wife of complainant telephonically
informed him that two persons namely Azruddin @ Ajju and
Akram @ Tirru came in front of the house of complainant
and they fired two bullet shot towards complainant’s wife in
her house and she as well as her children narrowly escaped
and they also threatened to kill the complainant; that on the
basis of statement of complainant and MLCs, present FIR
was registered under Section 323/341/307/452/506/34 IPC &
27 Arms Act.
6. At the outset, it is worthwhile to mention that vide
order dated 11.01.2024 the regular bail application of
applicant/accused was dismissed on merits by the Ld. ASJ,
wherein it was specifically mentioned that trial is yet to start
and possibility of threatening victim/witnesses cannot be
ruled out. Pertinently, there has been no change of
circumstances since the last order apart from the fact that
charge-sheet has been filed, which does not constitute any
substantial change. Further, filing of charge-sheet ipso facto
cannot be a ground for grant of bail and in fact on the
-- 3 of 5 --
4
contrary, filing of charge-sheet, in a way, crystalizes the
allegations against the applicant/accused. Moreover, the
present case is at the stage of consideration on the point of
charge and victim is yet to be examined, so suffice it to state
that there is no change of circumstances as such since the
last dismissal order. Thus, the present application is liable to
be dismissed on this count itself.
7. Even otherwise, on merits, allegations against the
applicant/accused are serious in nature, whereby he is stated
to have fired two bullet shots towards the complainant’s
wife. Further, weapon of offence i.e. pistol and two blank
cartridges are stated to have been recovered at the instance
of the applicant/accused and he has been specifically named
in the FIR.
8. Further, it has been contended that applicant is entitled
to parity, however, the said contention is not sustainable as
other co-accused persons were granted bail on different
considerations and their roles were different.
9. Also, applicant/accused is stated to be involved in
other criminal cases. Moreover, charge is yet to be framed
and victim is still to be examined. Therefore, given the
audacity of the act committed, the possibility of threatening
and intimidating the complainant/victim by
applicant/accused cannot be ruled out, in case bail is granted
at this stage.
10. Suffice it to state that considering the facts and
circumstances in totality, no ground as such is made out for
-- 4 of 5 --
5
grant of bail to the applicant. Accordingly, regular bail
application of accused/applicant under Section 439 Cr. PC
stands dismissed.
(Vineet Kumar)
ASJ-02/E-Court/Shahdara
KKD/Delhi/18.04.2024
-- 5 of 5 --