S. No. 105

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR

AT JAMMU

Bail App No. 16/2021 (O&M)

Reserved on: 06.04.2021

Pronounced on: 12.04.2021

Muneera Begum and others

...Applicant/Petitioner(s)

Through :- Mr. A. K. Sawhney, Advocate

v/s

<

UT of J&K and another

.....Respondent(s)

't

Through :- Mr. Adarsh Bhagat, GA for R-1

Mr. Sunil Sethi, Sr. Advocate with

Mr. Lawanya Sharma, Advocate for R-2.

Coram:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE

ORDER

1.

The petitioners, through the medium of the instant bail application,

are seeking bail in anticipation of their arrest in case FIR No. 0002/2021 for

offences under Sections 307, 341, 147, 148 & 149 of IPC and 4 & 25 of Arms

Act registered with Police Station, Surankote, District, Poonch.

2.

The facts giving rise to the filing of instant bail application are that

the complainant, namely, Mir Mohammad lodged a written report to Police

Station, Surankote to the effect that the petitioners are having a long standing

dispute with the complainant party over a piece of land and that with a criminal

intention to kill the complainant as well as his family members, the petitioners

2 Bail App No. 105/2021

wrongfully restrained his son, Altaf Hussain on 03.01.2021 at 9:00 a.m, attacked

him with a knife and inflicted serious injuries upon him. It was further alleged

that on hearing hue and cry of the injured person, the other family members of

the complainant rushed to the spot for rescuing the injured, but all the assailants

gave a severe beating to them and it was only with the aid and assistance of some

people who gathered over there that they were saved from the clutches of the

accused. It was further alleged that besides Altaf Hussain, daughter-in-law of

complainant, Rasila Begum and his grandson, Asif Altaf also received injuries

during the occurrence. After registration of the FIR, the Police swung into action

and started investigation of the case. The aforesaid offences are stated to have

been found established against the petitioners.

3.

It has been contended by the petitioners that they are innocent and

that they have been falsely implicated in the aforesaid FIR on account of

previous enmity over a property between the petitioners and the complainant

party. It is also stated that the injured, Altaf Hussain, who is an old person, was

advised surgery and that he is likely to be discharged from the Hospital. It is

further averred that the petitioners No. 1 to 3 are women, whereas the petitioner

No. 4 and 5 are senior citizens and as such, they deserve the concession of bail.

The petitioners undertake to abide by the conditions of bail that may be imposed

upon them by this Court and they also undertake to co-operate with the

investigating agency in case they are admitted to bail.

4.

Vide order dated 22.01.2021 passed by this Court, the petitioners

were admitted to ad interim anticipatory bail subject to certain conditions and the

said order has been extended from time to time.

3 Bail App No. 105/2021

5.

The bail application has been resisted by the learned counsel for the

respondent-State as well as by respondent No.2, the complainant by filing

response to the same.

6.

Respondent-State in its objections has submitted that the petitioners

have committed a heinous crime and that they are not entitled to concession of

bail. It has been further contended that weapon of offence is yet to be recovered

for which custodial interrogation of accused is necessary. It is also averred that