LAWS(BOM)-2002-9-43

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. AMINULLAH KHAN DULEKHAN

Decided On September 09, 2002
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Appellant
V/S
AMINULLAH KHAN DULEKHAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned advocates for the respective parties.

(2.) CRIMINAL Application No. 1880 of 2002 is filed by the applicant - State and CRIMINAL Application No. 1386 of 2002 is filed by the father of the deceased Shahista Parveen for cancellation of Anticipatory Bail granted to the non-applicants by an order dated-2.5.2002 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Amravati, in CRIMINAL Application No. 178 of 2002 filed by the present non-applicants.

(3.) I have perused the judgment and order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Amravati. He has not specifically referred to the contents of the dying declarations of Shahista dated-21.4.2002 and 24.4.2002. A perusal of the same would indicate that there was some specific role attributed to non-applicant Nos. 4 to 9 in the dying declaration dated-21.4.2002 and non-applicant Nos. 2 to 5 in the dying declaration dated-24.4.2002. 5a. The crime committed was a very serious crime and required in-depth investigation of all aspects including aspect of conspiracy, if any. It was not a proper case for grant of anticipatory bail, particularly ignoring the particulars of dying declarations dated-21.4.2002 and 24.4.2002. The Additional Sessions Judge, Amravati, ought to have taken into account that the investigation has just commenced and it was not the proper case at the moment to start appreciating the statements made by the deceased Shahista and to prevent the in-depth investigation by grant of anticipatory bail. From the facts of the case, it is clear that this was not a case of accidental death but a case of murder. In a case of this nature where the conspiracies are hatched behind closed doors, the police must be given reasonable opportunity of investigation by custodial interrogation. In my opinion, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amravati, committed a gross error in granting anticipatory bail, particularly to applicant Nos. 3 to 9 whom direct overt acts have been attributed in such a serious matter.