Sunday, October 27, 2024
154,225FansLike
654,155FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe

Allahabad High Court grants bail to Atin Zafar, a friend of former MP Atiq Ahmed’s son

The Allahabad High Court has granted conditional bail to Atin Zafar, friend of Asad, son of former MP late Atiq Ahmed.

A Single Bench of Justice Raj Beer Singh passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Bail Application filed by Atin Zafar.

The bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in case under Section 147, 384, 506, 201, 120-B, 195-A, 34 IPC, Section 42-B of Prisons Act, Section 8/13 of Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, police station Bithari Chainpur, District Bareilly with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

The first information report of this case was lodged by the In-charge of Police Post-New Jail, Bareilly on 07.03.2023 against Ashraf, Saddam, Lalla Gaddi, Dayaram @ Nanhey, Shivhari Awasthi and associates of Ashraf and some unknown officials/ employees of the Central Jail. Said Ashraf is brother of notorious gangster Atique Ahmad and he was lodged in Central Jail- 2, district Bareilly.

It was alleged that an information was received that Constable Shivhari Awasthi with the help of Saddam, Lalla Gaddi and jail officials, had been indulging in arranging meetings of visitors with Ashraf in jail in an illegal manner and that 6-7 persons have met Ashraf on a single I.D. The said meetings (commonly termed as ‘Milai’) were held after prescribed time and against the provisions of Jail manual.

Various serious cases are pending in different courts against Ashraf and he used to hatch conspiracy to kill police and prosecution officers and to threaten the witnesses in order to turn them hostile. Ashraf, along with other persons, indulged in extending threats and demanding ransom etc.

He used to make phone calls and after that the call detail history used to be deleted. The jail officials/employees are providing several facilities to Ashraf by obtaining presents and illegal gratification. Food and other items were being provided to Ashraf from the jail canteen, which is being run by Dayaram @ Nanhey, in connivance of jail officials. Due to these activities, the possibility of commission of some heinous offence cannot be ruled out.

On the basis of these allegations, the first information report was registered under Section 147, 384, 506, 201, 120-B, 195-A, 34 IPC, Section 42-B/54 of Prisons Act, Section 7/8/13 of Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act.

It has been argued by counsel for the applicant that the applicant-accused is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the case. Applicant is not named in the first information report. The first information report was lodged against co accused Ashraf, Saddam, Lalla Gaddi, Dayaram @ Nanhey, Shivhari Awasthi and associates of Ashraf and some unknown officials/ employees of the Central Jail and after investigation, police have submitted charge-sheet against co-accused Shivhari Awasthi, Dayaram @ Nanhey, Mohd Raza @ Lalla Gaddi, Rashid Ali, Furkan Navi Khan, Mohd Sarfuddin, Manoj Kumar Gaud, Farhad @ Guddu and Mohd Arif.

During further investigation, the involvement of applicant and some other co accused persons was shown on the basis of supplementary statement of Mohd Raza @ Lalla Gaddi.

Even as per prosecution version, the role shown of the applicant is that on the basis of CCTV footage, it was revealed that on 09.02.2023 four persons have entered into the jail along with jail warder Shivhari Awasthi and their identity were revealed as Asad, Atin (applicant), Irfan and Afsar Ahmad.

It is further submitted that co-accused Mohd Raza @ Lalla Gaddi, Dayaram @ Nanhey and Shivhari Awasthi, who were named in the first information report, have already been enlarged on bail by the Court. Similarly, co-accused Rashid Ali, Furkan Navi Khan, Mohd Sarfuddin, Manoj Kumar Gaud, Mohd Farhad @ Guddu and Mohd. Arif has also been enlarged on bail by the Court.

It is submitted that the case of the applicant is on better footing than those co-accused persons who have already been released on bail. Criminal history of two cases has been shown against the applicant and out of them, one case was registered against the applicant under Section 216 IPC and another case was registered under Gangster Act and the case under Gangster Act was registered after this case. The investigation is complete and a charge-sheet has already been submitted.

Lastly, it was submitted that applicant is a student and he is in jail since 23.09.2023 and that in case applicant is enlarged on bail, applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail.

A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail and argued that applicant is not named in the first information report but during further investigation, involvement of applicant was found.

“Essentially the allegations against the applicant is that he along with co-accused persons has visited the jail in an illegal manner, in order to meet co-accused Ashraf, who was lodged in the jail. Mainly the case is based on phone calls details of the accused persons and a CCTV footage, wherein the applicant along with co-accused persons was seen going into the jail. Similarly placed co-accused persons have already been granted bail. It was pointed out that said Ashraf has already passed away. The investigation is already complete and a charge-sheet has been filed.

Considering submissions of the counsel for the parties, nature of accusations, ingredients of the offences alleged vis-a-vis the evidence collected and all attending facts of the matter, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for grant of bail is made out”, the Court observed.

The Court ordered that,

Let the applicant Atin Zafar involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:

i. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial.

iii. The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

ii. The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

iv. The applicant shall not try to contact, threaten or otherwise influence the complainant or any of the witnesses of the case.

spot_img

News Update