GHULAM JEELAN GATOO Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application, the applicant/accused craves the indulgence of this Court in admitting him to bail for the commission of offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 336, 353, 332, 307 RPC, 16 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, and Section 3(1) of Police Property Protection Damage Act, on the grounds, Inter alia, that he was detained by the security forces without any rhyme or reason whatsoever and was lodged in Police Station Shopian, where a case bearing FIR No. 30/2018 for the commission of the aforesaid offences was registered against him. He moved an application for enlarging him on bail before the Court of the learned Principal District Judge, Shopain and the learned Principal District Judge, Shopian, by his order dated 24.03.2018, directed that the application being bereft of any merit and substance, entails rejection and is, accordingly, rejected.

(2.) Aggrieved by the order aforesaid, the petitioner has knocked at the portals of this Court by the medium of an application, wherein he has stated that he has been involved in the case without any justification, proof or evidence. He is an innocent person. His continued detention will prevent him to defend himself effectively and prove his innocence. It is further stated in the application by the applicant that his involvement in the crime imputed to him has been manipulated by the police and the same is motivated by political considerations. The allegations levelled against him are baseless. He is not connected with any political activity, which may be termed as illegal, anti-national or anti-social as alleged by the police authorities. It is also stated that he has not committed any offence which carries the punishment of imprisonment for life or death and the Court below has withheld the bail as a means of punishment without the trial of the case. The applicant has also submitted that he is seriously ill and his health is deteriorating due to his continued confinement. The applicant has also contended that he will abide by all the conditions, which this Court may impose on him while granting bail. He will not indulge in any illegal activity and will face the trial regularly. In the end, the applicant has prayed that the instant application be allowed and the respondents be directed to release him from the custody forthwith.

(3.) The respondent - non applicant has filed the objections, stating therein that on 02.02.2018, the police authorities of police station, Shopian, received an information from a reasonable sources to the effect that in view of a call given by the activists of the Hurriyat Conference (JKLF Group), comprised of the Chairman, Hurriyat Conference Mohammad Yaseen Malik, the accused Ghulam Jeelani Gatoo S/o Ab. Aziz Gatoo and Faisal Amin Mir @ Chota Geelani S/o Mohd Amin Mir Ro Bonne Bazaar, Shopian and Arsalaan Bashir S/o Bashir Ahmad R/o Bonne Bazaar, Shopian, etc. assembled after Friday prayers at Jamia Masjid, Shopian, in the center of the road. They raised antinational slogans against the Union of India. They instigated the people who assembled there as a consequence of which they pelted stones upon the security personnel deployed there. They violated the restrictions that were imposed by the District Magistrate, Shopian in exercise of his powers under Section 144 Cr. PC. The stones were pelted with intention to kill the police/security forces besides causing damage to the government property. The respondent has further stated that the offence under Section 16 of the Act of 1967, is triable by the Special Court only. Furthermore, it has been stated that the accusations levelled against the accused are well founded and, as such, no bail can be granted to him. It is also stated that the accused is not only involved in unlawful activities, but his involvement surfaces in so many other FIRs registered against him at the same Police Station for the commission of different offences. The accused is a habitual offender and has been instrumental in fomenting trouble in district Shopian, every now and then. The respondent has further stated that it will be detrimental to the State at large, if the accused is left to roam about freely. The offences committed by the accused carry a punishment of life imprisonment. The respondent has finally prayed that this Court may be pleased to reject the bail application in view of the facts enumerated above.