SUNIL HALL J. - (1.) APPLICANTS Ak lakh, Mohd. Jeeshan @ Janu and Bali Pandit @ Shudhansu Tripathi vide above referred applications are seeking bail in case Crime No. 253 of 2010, under sections 147, 148, 149, 364, 323, 504, 506, 341, 342, 34 IPC and section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act registered at Police Station Dhoomanganj, District Allahabad.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated, facts relevant for disposal of the above bail applications are that an F.I.R. was registered on 21.5.2010 with regard to an incident dated 20.5.2010 wherein it is stated that in the, intervening night of 21.5.2010 eleven persons forcibly kidnapped the brother of the complainant namely Guddu Pal (hereinafter referred to as an 'abductee'). F.I.R. reveals that accused persons came in Indica and Travera at about 11 p.m. on the pretext of seeking some information from the said abductee, he was called out from his house and as soon as he stepped out; they took him in their vehicle and fled away. The abductee is said to have been recovered from the accused persons on the next day. The cause for abduction was that the said abductee was required to appear as a witness in Case Crime No. 288 of 2007, under sections 147,148,149, 364, 323, 504, 341, 342 IPC. In order to avoid his evidence in the said trial and to intimidate him not to depose in the said case he was kidnapped. It has, also come in the report that one of the accused Shamshad was an accused in Crime No. 288 of 2007 where the abductee was listed as an eyewitness. Motive for kidnapping was to ensure that the eye-witness should not depose in the case against the accused persons in that case. The statement of Guddu Pal was recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. in which he named the accused persons. After investigation, report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. was filed by the Investigating Agency in which the following evidence has come on record in respect of the allegations levelled against the applicants:- (a) That abductee was kidnapped by the accused persons to ensure that he may not depose in Case Crime No. 288 of 2007, in which he was an eye-witneess regarding abduction of Mahendra Patel; (b) That the abductee was recovered on the next date from the Indica Car from the custody of accused- applicants namely Shamshad, Aslam, Nihal and Ek lakh on 21.5.2010 at 13.10 hours near Chaufatka G.T. Road, which is about two kilometers from the Dhoomanganj Police Station;
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the applicants has contended that the applicants have wrongly been implicated in the aforesaid case and they are in jail since May, 2010. They are not involved in the commission of the offence. It is further stated that their bail applications have been rejected only by way of punishment. No trial in case as on date has commenced in the matter. They are involved in the offences which do not carry the punishment for death or life imprisonment. On the other hand stand of the respondents is that the applicants are habitual offenders and their conduct is inimical to the public at large. It is further stated that prima facie there is strong evidence against the applicants and there is probability of their being convicted for the said offences. Looking to their conduct it clearly emerges that they are in the habit of threatening the witnesses and are causing fetters in the trial.;