Court No. 20
Criminal Misc. Case No. 277 (B) of 2010
Liyaqat Ali ...Versus... State of U.P.
Hon'ble Raj Mani Chauhan,J.
Learned A.G.A. files counter affidavit and learned counsel for the
accused applicant files rejoinder affidavit, which are taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the
State and perused the record.
The accused-applicant Liyaqat Ali is involved and detained in
Case Crime No. 625 of 2009, under Sections 302, 201, 120-B I.P.C., and
Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster Act, from Police Station Rehra Bazar,
District Balrampur and he has applied for bail.
The prosecution case, in brief, is that deceased Renu alias
Baglaha was widow of Late Ram Pher Kumhar. Her dead body was
found by the villagers on 26.9.2009 in the pond of village Mahuadhar,
Police Station Rehra Bazar, District Balrampur. Her head, hands and feet
were separated from her body. Her hands and feet were kept in separate
bag while her body was kept in another bag. The further prosecution case
is that the deceased was issue-less. Her collateral Mangal Prasad and
Ram Surat wanted to grab her property. When the deceased moved an
application for mutation of her name in place of her husband Late Ram
Pher, the application was opposed by Mangal Prasad and Ram Surat.
Consequently, a litigation was going on between them before the Naib
Tahsildar, Utraula, Balrampur. The accused Magal Prasad alias Chhangur
and Ram Surat had conspiracy with accused Nisar and Liyaqat Ali, who
were ready to finish the deceased after accepting amount from accused
Magal Prasad and Ram Surat. Learned counsel for the accused applicant
contends that the entire prosecution case rests on circumstantial
evidence. The circumstantial evidence available against the accused
applicant is that he was heard by one Annu Prasad that he will get the
deceased Renu alias Baglaha done to death. She would be done to death
by one Nisar Ahmad. There is no other evidence against the accused
applicant. This much evidence is not sufficient to draw inference that the
accused applicant was involved in the commission of murder of the
deceased. The chain of circumstantial evidence is not complete to infer
that the accused applicant was involved in the commission of the murder
of the deceased. Therefore, the accused applicant deserves to be released
on bail. The accused applicant further contends that accused applicant
has been challaned under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster Act too. As per
gang chart, there is no other criminal case except the present one.
Therefore, the accused applicant also deserves to be released on bail
under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster Act.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail application.
Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the accused
applicant and learned A.G.A.
The prosecution case rests on circumstantial evidence. Keeping in
view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without
expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the accused applicant
may be released on bail.
Let applicant Liyaqat Ali be released on bail in the aforesaid case
crime number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in
the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
13.01.2010
Sanjay/-