JOHAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -This application has been filed by the applicant Johar with a prayer that he may be released on bail in Case Crime No. 1025 of 2005, under Sections 302, 504, 120B and 34, I.P.C., P.S. Khatauli, district Muzaffarnagar.

(2.) THE prosecution story, in brief, is that the F.I.R. in this case has been lodged by Mohd. Muddisir on 20.12.2005 at 10.30 a.m. in respect of the incident which had occurred on 20.12.2005 at about 9.20 a.m., the distance of the police station was about 1 km. from the alleged place of the occurrence. THE F.I.R. has been lodged against the applicant and four other co-accused persons namely Jauhar, Talha, Marguv and Sahin. It is alleged that on 20.12.2005 at about 9.30 a.m., the first informant alongwith his uncle the deceased Ahmad Mukhtar and Shamsad alias Babbu were going to their workshop. When they reached in front of Khatauli Roadways, the applicant, co-accused Gauhar and Talha armed with country-made pistols, cought hold the deceased and uttered in an abusive language that he would not permitted to give the evidence in a case of murder of Hamid and Sajid and discharged shots at the deceased. Consequently he received gun shot injuries and died instantaneously, the alleged incident was witnessed by the first informant, Shamsad and other persons, due to this incident the dead body of the deceased was lying on the spot. THE aforesaid murder of the deceased had been committed at the instance of co-accused Marguv and Shahin as per their planning. THE co-accused Marguv, co-accused Gauhar and applicant Jauhar were accused in a case of murder of Hamid Mukhtar and Sajid Mukhtar. THE deceased was the eye-witness of the alleged incident and he was the first informant also. His evidence was deposed in the Court on 3.1.2006. Due to this reason, the deceased was murdered prior to date of the evidence. According to the post-mortem examination report, the deceased had received four gun shot wound of entries.

(3.) IN reply of the above contention, it is submitted by the learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant that the alleged occurrence has taken place in broad day light, the F.I.R. was promptly lodged, the alleged incident had been witnessed by the persons, the applicant was having strong motive to commit the murder of the deceased because he was the witness in a murder case of Kamid Mukhtar and Sajid Mukhtar, the date for recording his defence was fixed on 3.1.2006, prior to that date he has been murdered by the applicant and other co-accused and the plea of alibi taken by the applicant is absolutely false because he was detained in any jail at the time of the commission of the alleged offence and the applicant actively participated in committing the murder of the deceased and he was seen by the witnesses, some other person was seen in the jail in the name of the applicant because the murder of the deceased is pre-planned. The plea of alibi shall be considered by the trial court. At this stage, this plea has no importance. IN case the applicant is released on bail, he shall tamper with the evidence because he is a witness in earlier murder case in which two persons of his family were done to death, therefore the applicant may not be released on bail.