UP Govt Op­poses Bail, But Con­cedes on Par­ity

De­fence lawyer says the 3 men still be­hind bars will also get bail on par­ity

The Economic Times - - Pure Politics -

Dadri: Six key ac­cused that got bail in the Akhlaq mur­der case in the last four months from Al­la­habad HC did see the Ut­tar Pradesh gov­ern­ment ve­he­mently op­pos­ing their prayers for bail be­fore court but ul­ti­mately con­ced­ing on the ground of par­ity.

A re­view of the nearly iden­ti­cal bail or­ders in the five cases by ET shows the pen­du­lum swung in the favour of these ac­cused as all of them had no pre­vi­ous crim­i­nal his­tory though HC spec­i­fied it was “not com­ment­ing on the mer­its” of the Akhlaq mur­der case. Pu­nit and Arun, who were ac­cused by the po­lice of lynch­ing Akhlaq, got bail on April 6. They con­tended their name was nei­ther men­tioned by Akhlaq’s wife in the FIR nor by the in­for­mant in his state­ment to po­lice. Though Akhlaq’s daugh­ter Shahista named them in her state­ment be­fore a mag­is­trate 68 days af­ter the mur­der, she did not name them in her state­ment to the po­lice a fort­night af­ter the mur­der. The ac­cused pleaded “no spe­cific role” had been as­cribed to them in the lynch­ing. “Learned gov­ern­ment at­tor­ney has ve­he­mently op­posed the prayer. Con­sid­er­ing the facts and cir­cum­stances of the case, na­ture of ac­cu­sa­tion made against ap­pli­cant and without com­ment­ing on the mer­its of the case, I find it a case of bail,” the HC order said re­gard­ing Pu­nit and Arun. Four more ac­cused, Vishal, Sau­rabh,Gau­ra­vandShivamthen asked for bail on grounds of par­ity with Pu­nit and Arun and se­cured bail on July 31, 27, 11 and 7 re­spec­tively. All four pleaded to court that they were “in­no­cent and falsely im­pli­cated”. Shivam pleaded that asArun­had­got­bailonApril6­fora sim­i­lar role in the mur­der as him, he should be granted bail too - which was ac­cepted by court. Gau­rav then cited Shivam’s bail, Sau­rabh cited Gau­rav’s bail and Vishal­cit­edthe­bail of all the five granted bail be­fore him. “On be­half of state bail has been op­posed but learned gov­ern­ment at­tor­ney con­ceded on the­p­ointof par­ity,” HC order re­gard­ing Vishal says. A de­fence lawyer told ET that three more­ac­cused­still­be­hind­bar­swill al­sosoonget­bailon­samegrounds.

HC did fix strin­gent con­di­tions while grant­ing bail. The ac­cused can­not seek any ad­journ­ment on dates fixed for ev­i­dence dur­ing trial or the trial court can treat it as abuse of lib­erty of bail. Each ac­cused has been di­rected to re­main present be­fore trial court on each date and co­op­er­ate with the trial, not tam­per with the ev­i­dence.

The ac­cused can­not seek any ad­journ­ment on dates fixed for ev­i­dence

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India

© PressReader. All rights reserved.