SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

JAMMU AND KASHMIR HIGH COURT
Mohan Lal, J.
Mst. Zaib-Ul-Nissa and Anr. —Petitioners
versus
U.T. of J&K through SHO P/S
Gursai —Respondent
CRM (M) No.852 of 2021, CrLM No.2384 of 2021
In Bail App. No.384 of 2021, CrLM 2234 of 2021
Bail App No.417 of 2021, CrlM No.2385 of 2021, CRM (M) No.784 of 2021
Decided on 18.4.2022

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioners:Mr. Himanshu Beotra Advocate
For the Petitioners:Mr. Sunil Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Lawanya Sharma Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Adarsh Bhagat, GA

IMPORTANT POINT
Bail – Mere apprehension that accused would temper with prosecution evidence or intimidate witnesses cannot be a ground to refuse bail unless prosecution shows that accused actually tried such tempering/intimidation.

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 439 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 366/111/34 – Bail applications – Petitioner booked for abetment to suicide – Circumstances which have been brought into focus by respondents as also by Sessions Judge are that accused persons tried to influence investigation at initial stage – Post-mortem was got conducted by Board only through intervention of Dy. Commissioner – Nothing has been revealed nor any material has been shown by prosecution or by Principal Sessions Judge to substantiate this plea – It is a mere bald assertion which cannot be accepted unless there is some material to that extent – Even if prima-facie case is established against accused, approach of court in granting bail should be that accused should not be detained by way of punishment, and regarding influencing of witnesses, material witnesses cannot be expected to be win over by accused – Fact that out of nine prosecution witnesses, seven material witnesses stands already examined before court including prosecutrix, so mere apprehension of respondent that applicant- accused if enlarged on bail would temper with prosecution evidence or possibility of his winning over prosecution witnesses can be ruled out – It is a settled law that mere apprehension that accused would temper with prosecution evidence or intimidate witnesses cannot be a ground to refuse bail unless prosecution shows that accused actually tried such tempering/intimidation – Apprehension of respondent that applicant-accused may abscond from justice can be taken care of by imposing certain terms and conditions – Bail granted. (Paras 6 and 7)

Result: Application allowed. Leave granted.

ORDER

Mohan Lal, J.—1. By this common order, two (2) bail applications bearing Nos. 384/2021 & 417/2021 titled Zaib-Ul-Nissa vs U.T of J&K through SHO P/S Gursai and Mohd Iqbal Vs U.T of J&K through SHO P/S Gursai would be disposed off as both of them arise out of common FIR No. 0115/2021 u/ss 366/111/34 IPC. In petition No. 384/2021, petitioner(s)/accused Mst. Zaib-Ul-Nissa has claimed bail on the grounds, that she is citizen of India and entitled to all the fundamental rights enshrined under part III of constitution of India; that she is working as staff Nurse in National Rural Health Mission (NRHM) and is mother of 3 daughters who is in deep pressure since the death of her husband and victimized by the respondent for the alleged crime done by her, though she has not committed any offence; that on one random morning of 02-10-2021 at about 8.30 am petitioner(s)/accused returned her home after dropping her children to tuition class and was getting ready to leave for job, she tried to awake her sleeping husband, however, getting no response, she called the brother of her husband who was residing adjacent to her house and after his brother came to the side of petitioner she found her husband dead who died during sleep; that the respondent on the behest of some persons in order to implicate the petitioner converted the inquest proceedings and lodged impugned FIR u/ss 306/111/34 IPC on 08-11-2021 whereby the respondent without obtaining the postmortem report booked petitioner for abetment to suicide according to his own whims and fancies; that the respondent thereafter took the petitioner into custody and arrested her for the offences which she never committed for which no medical report as to the cause of death has been obtained by the respondent; that from the perusal of FIR no case is made out against petitioner in as much as no implication of alleged offences are fulfilled and there is no occasion to implicate the petitioner in the FIR; that the petitioner applied for bail before Ld. Sub-Judge Special Mobile Magistrate Poonch who rejected the bail application of the petitioner vide order dated 26-11-2021; that one of the co-accused namely Rizwan Ahmed has been admitted to bail by this court on 22-11-2021 in bail application No.366/2021; that the petitioner undertakes to abide by all the terms and conditions imposed by the court, and in case she is not granted bail, she would suffer irreparable loss which could not be compensated lateron. Application is supported by an affidavit.

2. In bail application No. 417/2021 petitioner accused Mohd Iqbal has claimed bail u/s 437 RPC on the grounds, that he is citizen of India and resident of U.T. of J&K entitled to the protection of his fundamental rights guaranteed under Pat III of the Constitution of India; that he has been wrongly and falsely implicated in the above FIR No. 115/2021 dated 08-11-2021 registered with police station Gursai for commission of offences u/ss 306/111/34 IPC, wherein his bail application has been rejected by the court of Sub-Judge Special Mobile Magistrate Poonch alongwith co-accused vide order dated 26-11-2021; that one Tahir Mehmood (deceased) was running a chemist/medical shop, was a drug addict due to which he was under huge debts, usually lie in unconscious state under the influence of drugs overdose, his brother had on eye over his moveable and immoveable property and in order to grab his property they always tried to expel his wife Ziab-Ul-Nissa from her matrimonial house and use to level false and frivolous allegations against her for her extra-marital relationship with said Mohd Iqbal; that the husband of Zaib-Ul- Nissa namely Tahir Mehmood was found dead under mysterious circumstances at his residential house on 02-10-2021 and news of his death got reported to police station Gursai, inquest proceedings u/s 174 Cr. PC got commenced, postmortem of the dead body of deceased was got conducted & viscera of the deceased was preserved and sent to FSL Jam

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top