RAVINDRA SINGH,J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Satish Trivedi, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Bharat Singh and Sri K.D.Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A.for the State of U.P.and Sri Dilip Kumar, Sri Rajiv Gupta, Sri Rajrshi Gupta and Sri Anil Kumar Singh learned counsel for the complainant.
(2.) THIS bail application has been moved by the applicant Mohd. Tahir with a prayer that he may be released on bail in case crime No. 146 of 2009 under section 302 I.P.C., P.S. Nagphani, District Moradabad. The facts, in brief, of this case are that the FIR has been lodged by Smt. Jahan Ara on 6.4.2009 at 11.30 p.m. in respect of the incident which had occurred on 22.3.2009 at about 11.00 p.m., the applicant and co-accused Hashim, co-accused Firasat and co-accused Mohd. Quamar are named in the FIR. It is alleged that Mohd. Farid, husband of the first informant, was murdered on 23.3.2009, at the last time, a false case was lodged against him by Mohd. Hashim at the instance of the applicant, the police was being pressurised to arrest Mohd. Farid. On 22.3.2009 at about 11.00 p.m., the applicant went to the house of first informant and asked that he had made talks with Firasat and Mohd.Umi, they have called the deceased Modh. Farid but he refused to go in the night, then the applicant went to the house of Mohd. Imran from where he asked the first informant that the deceased would be lifted by the police and he would be insulted. Then the deceased was taken by the applicant from his house, the first informant saw from her Balcony that two or three persons were standing outside her house, the deceased went in their company. The first informant remained disturbed whole of the night because the deceased did not return, she gave telephonic massage also but the applicant replied that talk was going on, in the morning of 23.3.2009 at about 10.30 a.m., the applicant came to the house of the first informant and demanded Rs.12,000/-, papers and clothes of the deceased, the first informant asked that she was not able to contact with her husband because his telephone was switched off. Then it was told by the applicant that the telephone battery of the deceased had discharged, thereafter, the deceased was brought by the applicant at about 12.00 o'clock in the dead condition, on query the applicant replied that the deceased was murdered by the police. According to the post mortem examination report, the deceased had sustained an abraded contusion on the left side of nose, the cause of death could not be ascertained hence viscera was preserved. The applicant applied for bail before the learned Sessions Judge, Moradabad, who rejected the same on 28.8.2009.
(3.) IT is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that FIR of this case is too much delayed. It is surprising that the deceased was taken from his house by the applicant and others in the night of 22.3.2009, but report has been lodged after the deceased was murdered by the applicant, there was no reason for the applicant to bring the dead body of the deceased to the house of the first informant. It appears that story of taking away from the house and after committing the murder bring it to the house of informant is absolutely false and concocted because the deceased had not gone from his house, the deceased had died at his house but to conceal the real fact, the FIR has not been promptly lodged, it has been lodged on 6.4.2009. According to the post mortem examination report, the deceased had sustained only one abraded contusion, having dimension of 2 cm x 6 cm on the left side of nose, the cause of the death could not be ascertained, hence viscera was preserved, it does not show that by exercising power, the poison was administered to the deceased, according to the viscera report, the death was by intake of poisonous insecticide. The first informant herself gave an applicant in writing to police station Nagphani, then G.D.entry was made on 23.3.2009 as G.D. Entry No. 26 at 15.10, mentioning therein that her husband died all of a sudden on 23.3.2009. On that information, the inquest report was prepared. The applicant had lodged the FIR on 23.3.2009 at 5.20 p.m. in respect of the incident which had occurred on 23.3.2009 at 8.00 a.m. against Mohd. Hashim, Firasat son of Liyakat and 3 others, in case crime no. 107 of 2009 under section 395, 397 I.P.C., during investigation, the manner of occurrence of the present case has also been changed. The applicant is innocent, he has not committed the alleged offence he has been falsely implicated only on account of rivalry the applicant is not having any criminal antecedent, he may be released on bail. He is in jail since 2.7.2009.;