YUNIS Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The two accused-applicants, namely, Yunis, son of Noora and Haroon, son of Nazir have applied for bail under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 429/120-B, I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Indian Arms Act.

(2.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the accused-applicants, the learned Additional Government Advocate, and Shri Ram Shiromani Shukla, learned Counsel for the complainant.

(3.) The prosecution story as embedded in the F.I.R. is that the deceased Yakeenuddin Qureshi and the co-accused Bhuggal were on an inimical terms, cases in Criminal Courts were pending between the parties. The co-accused Bhuggal and others had made efforts for the arrest of the deceased Yakeenuddin Qureshi, but the High Court had put embargo on the arrest of the deceased, this had been felt by the co-accused Bhuggal and others. On 29-1-1997 one day before the occurrence, the co-accused Bhuggal had told the informant (brother of the deceased) that he had saved the deceased from the High Court but he would not be able to save him from the accused persons. On 30-1-1997 at about 6.30 a.m. the deceased and the informant when came out of the mosque after offering prayers, the seven accused persons Bhuggal, Haroon, Yunis, son of Noora, Iliyas, Yunis, son of Noor Mohammad and Mohammad were sighted. The co-accused Bhuggal exhorted and all the seven accused persons armed with revolvers indiscriminately fired on the deceased, resulting in injuries to him. Deceased was taken to hospital, on way he succumbed to the injuries. The F.I.R. was lodged immediately after the occurrence at 7.50 a.m. at Police Station Kotwali, District Mathura.