Chhunnu @ Chhidda vs State of U.P.

Ravindra Singh, J.—This application has been filed by the applicant Chhunnu @ Chhidda with a prayer that he may be released on bail in case Crime No. 347 of 2007 under sections 147, 148, 149, 307 and 302 I.P.C., P.S. Asmoli, District Moradabad.

Heard Sri S.M.A. Kazmi, learned senior Advocate assisted by Sri S.M. Iqbal Hasan, learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and Sri Sunil Kumar Rai, Sri Rupak Chaubey and Sri S.A. Shah, learned Counsel for the complainant.

It is contended by learned Counsel for the applicant that according to the prosecution version the FIR of this case has been lodged on 18.9.2007 at 5.25 p.m. in respect of the incident which had occurred on 18.9.2007 at about 3.00 p.m. In this case 22 persons including the applicant have been named as accused. It is alleged that on 18.9.2007 at about 3.00 p.m. the first informant had gone to purchase some goods from the shop of Anzar where Basaruddin @ Lala had also come to purchase the fruits but the fruits were not given to credit to Basaruddin @ Lala, then he hurdled the abuses to Anzar and started marpeet but the first informant came in rescue to pacify the dispute then he was challenged by Basaruddin (@) Lala, thereafter, he along with other coaccused persons including the applicant having the guns and country made pistols came there, then the first informant went to the house of his brother Qayyum. The accused persons raided the house of Qayyum, at his shouting many persons of the village came there who challenged the accused persons then the accused persons discharged the shots indiscriminately. Consequently, Mohd. Rizwan, Raish Ahmad, Anzar Husain, Suhaib, Hidayatulla and Mozammil sustained injuries in which the condition of Rais Ahmad and Mohd. Rizwan was very serious. One Zubaida was also beaten by coaccused Taufiq by the but of the gun who had also sustained injury. The FIR was lodged under sections 147, 148, 149, 307 and 302 I.P.C. but subsequently two of the injured namely Rizwan and Anzar Husain succumbed to his injuries. According to the medical examination report of Hidayatulla he had sustained three lacerated wounds, the injured Zubaida had sustained two injuries in which injury No. 1 was leniar abrasion and injury No. 2 was traumatic swelling, the injured Mohd. Suhaib had sustained three lacerated wound and injured Muzammil had sustained two injuries in which injury No. 1 was abraded contusion and injury No. 2 was contused automatic swelling, the injured Rais Ahmad had sustained six injuries which was lacerated wounds. The deceased Rizwan (@) Bhura was medically examined in which he had sustained three lacerated wounds and the deceased Anzar Husain @ Anjar Ahmad was medically examined on 18.9.2007 had sustained seven lacerated wounds.

It is further contended that the alleged occurrence has taken place in a sudden quarrel, it was not pre intended. There is a crossversion of the alleged incident. The cross FIR in case Crime No. 347A of 2007 under sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 452 and 504 I.P.C. has been lodged by coaccused Basruddin @ Lala on 18.9.2007 at 6.40 p.m. in respect of the incident dated 18.9.2007 at about 3.00 p.m. From the side of applicant also five persons namely Arman Jahan, Ahsan Intzar, Mohd Navi, Julfikar Akhtari and Basruddin @ Lala had sustained injuries. The medical examination report of Arman Jahan aged about 12 years shows that she has sustained five gun shot wound of injuries, medical examination report of Smt. Akhtari aged about 50 years shows that she has sustained one gun shot wound of entry and two abrasions and medical examination report of Mohd. Navi shows that he has sustained one gun shot wound of entry, the same has not been explained but under the pressure of the present government the final report has been submitted by the I.O. in cross case against which the protest petition has been filed. The injured from the applicant side were medically examined by the police and they have sustained gun shot injuries which cannot be said to be manufactured or procured one and at this stage it cannot be said as to which of the party was aggressor.

In reply of the above contention, it is submitted by learned A.G.A. and learned Counsel for the complainant that the applicant and another coaccused persons in a preplanned manner have committed the alleged offence. In cross case the final report has been submitted because the injured of the cross case stated during investigation that they had sustained injuries due to firing done by the applicant side but in its rejoinderaffidavit it is submitted affidavit by learned Counsel for the applicant that no such statement has been recorded/in the investigation of this case. It is further contended by learned Counsel for the complainant that in case the applicant is released on bail, he shall tamper with the evidence, therefore, he may not be released on bail.

Considering the facts, circumstances of this case, submissions made by learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A, learned Counsel for the complainant and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case the applicant is entitled to be released on bail with the below mentioned conditions.

Let the applicant Chhunna @ Chhidda involved in case Crime No. 347 of 2007 under sections 147, 148, 149, 307 and 302 I.P.C., P.S. Asmoli, District Moradabad be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.

The applicant shall report to the Court of learned C.J.M. concerned in the first week of each month to show his good conduct and behaviour.

He shall not tamper with the evidence.

In case of default of any of the above mentioned conditions, the bail granted to the applicant shall be deemed cancelled and he shall be taken into custody forthwith.