Court No. - 46 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 7568 of 2009 Petitioner :- Shabihul Hasnain Respondent :- State Of U.P. Petitioner Counsel :- Imran Ullah,Syed Suhail Asghar Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Sheo Kumar Singh,J.
Hon’ble Shyam Shankar Tiwari,J.
Heard Sri Imran Ullah, learned Advocate who appeared to
press the bail application of Shabihul Hasnain son of late
Muntazir Hasnain in Criminal Appeal No. 7568 of 2009 and
of Azizul Hasnain son of late Muntazir Hasnain who are
convicted for an offence punishable under Section so
mentioned in the judgment and he is to serve out the
sentence so provided and learned A.G.A.
Submission is that admittedly it is a night incident and
although two witnesses are said to be there but in fact no
body saw the incident and appellants are named, for the
reasons so stated from the appellant side and otherwise
which come on record.
Submission is that even on acceptance of the entire
prosecution version role of firing and the fire which hit was
by Shabihul Hasnain and so far the appellants are
concerned only role is of extortion.
Submission is that this being clear in the statement,
distinction can be drawn between the case of the appellants
and that of Safiqul who is the main shooter and the person
who is responsible for the death/murder of the deceased.
It is further submitted that in respect to the statement of the
PW-1 it has come that in her presence entire incident has
taken place but at the same time it was in the cross that on
account of the threat of the accused she went inside of the
room and bolted it and in the morning hours when mohalla
people assembled and police came only then she came out.
Submission is that appellants were on bail and they did not
misuse the same.
In response to the aforesaid learned Government side
submits that although it is a night incident PW-1 who claims
to have seen incident did not report the matter in the night
and she remained inside the house due to the threat of the
accused persons as the prosecution version was
corroborated by the witnesses and believed by the learned
trial judge, it is not a fit case for grant of bail.
There is no dispute about the fact that from the initial version
and from the evidence the role of firing on the deceased is
assigned to the Shafiqul and so far the appellants are
concerned only role of extortion is there.
Besides aforesaid, the circumstances in which the lady got
herself detained in the house for whole night and no
information was passed to the neighbours and the police, is
also to be taken note.
Both the appellants were on bail during the trial.
Let the appellants Shabihul Hasnain son of late Muntazir
Hasnain and Azizul Hasnain son of late Muntazir Hasnain be
enlarged on bail in S.T. No. 1500 of 1999 (State Vs. Azizul
Hasnain and others) on their furnishing a personal bond and
two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the
court concerned. Realisation of fine to the extent of 50%
shall remain stayed. Balance amount of fine shall be
deposited forthwith. The release order shall be sent after
deposit of the balance amount of fine.
Order Date :- 7.1.2010
Sachdeva