In Re: Ahammed Ali Khan vs State Of West Bengal & Ors

The petitioner is seeking bail in connection with a case relating to offences punishable under Sections 147/148/149/427/326/307/302/ 201/120B of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act and Section 9(b) of the Indian Explosives Act.

Case diary of the present case as well as Amdanga Police Station Case No. 389 of 2018 dated 29th August, 2018 are placed on record.

Learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is suffering from eye ailment and is under medication. It is patently absurd that he was a member of the unlawful assembly which murdered three persons, as alleged. It is further submitted that the petitioner is not a member of the locality and there is no explanation how he was identified by the FIR maker as well as other witnesses. On the other hand, it has been strongly contended that the petitioner belongs to a different political party and there was disturbance in the village over the control of a Gram Panchayat over which the supporters of the political party of the petitioner had approached this court seeking appropriate orders for police protection under Article 226 of the Constitution of India vide W.P. No. 14690(W) of 2018. On the other hand, it was the supporters of the said political party who were subjected to brutal assault and son of one Md. Alibuddin was abducted and killed by the associates of the de-facto complainant which is the subject matter of the other criminal case namely, Amdanga Police Station Case No. 389 of 2018 dated 29th August, 2018. He accordingly, prays for bail.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State strongly disputes the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner. Relying on the progress of investigation in both the cases, he submits that the investigations have proceeded in a fair and impartial manner and no political bias is reflected in the attitude of the Investigating Agency to both the cases. It is further submitted that the statements of the witnesses as well as the first informant shows that the petitioner was a member of the unlawful assembly which went on a rampage in the village resulting in the death of three persons namely, Kuddus Ali Gani, Nasir Halder and Sattar Ali Mandal @ Chattar Mondal. Leading statement of the petitioner has resulted in the recovery of fire arms as well as bombs.

We have considered the materials on record. We note that the petitioner does not belong to the village where the incidents occurred. It is also relevant to note that he belongs to a rival political party and supporters of the said party had approached this court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction seeking police protection. Although the statements in the case diary show the presence of the petitioner as a member of the alleged unlawful assembly, no overt act has been attributed to him. It is a matter to be decided in the course of trial as to how the identity of the petitioner was revealed to the said witnesses in the light of the fact that he was not a member of the locality. It is also important to note that the statements of the purported eyewitnesses speak of assault and death of the victims simultaneously although in the FIR it appears that one of the victims namely, Kuddus Ali Gani was murdered at 8:00 P.M. while another victim namely, Nasir Halder had been done to death at 9:30 P.M. These issues including the veracity of the witnesses may be thrashed out in the course of trial. However, in view of the aforesaid discussion particularly the fact that the petitioner does not appear to be a member of the locality and there is no explanation as to how his identity was known by the eyewitnesses and as no overt act apart from presence as a member of the unlawful assembly has been alleged in the instant case and he is suffering from serious ailments, we are of the opinion that further detention of the accused/petitioner is not necessary and he may be enlarged on bail however, subject to strict conditions.

Therefore, the accused/petitioner, namely Ahammed Ali Khan, be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand only), with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, North 24-Parganas at Barasat subject to condition that the said petitioner shall appear before the trial court on every date of hearing until further orders and shall not intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence in any manner whatsoever and on further condition that he shall not enter the district of North 24-Parganas except for attending court proceedings until further orders and shall provide the address where he shall presently reside to the Investigating Agency as well as the court below and shall report to the Officer-in-charge of the police station within whose jurisdiction he shall presently reside once in a week until further orders.

In the event he fails to appear before the trial court without justifiable cause, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel his bail automatically without reference to this court.

The application for bail, thus, stands allowed.