IRSHAD Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED counsel for the applicant, LEARNED AGA for the State and perused the material available on record.

(2.) THIS application for bail has been moved on behalf of the accused-applicant Irshad involved in case crime no. 1305 of 2011, under Sections 452, 506, 307, 326 IPC, P.S. Sihani Gate, District- Ghaziabad. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that incident took place on 16.11.2011 at 8.30 p.m. whereas the FIR was lodged on 19.11.2011 at 6.35 p.m. and no explanation for the delay has been furnished. It was further submitted that the entire prosecution story is improbable and unbelievable. The applicant had no motive to commit crime or to harm the sons of the first informant. The injuries suffered by both the victim were not dangerous to life and the applicant has no criminal history to his credit.

(3.) THE injured Rahul @ Akash Verma knew the applicant from before. THE applicant had motive to dis-figure the face of Rahul as he did not like Preeti to be in the company of Rahul @ Akash Verma and feeling jealous, he, alongwith the co-accused, poured acid on both the sons of the first informant. Even then the applicant was not satisfied and again visited the house of the complainant on 19.11.2011 and threatened both the injured and was apprehended on spot. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, gravity of the offence and dare-devil manner, in which the applicant poured acid on both the injured and after three days, again went to their house to threaten them, I do not find it to be a fit case to release the applicant on bail. THE conduct of the applicant gives rise to a suspicion that if the applicant is released on bail, he would again try to harm the sons of the complainant and, therefore, it would not be proper to release him on bail.