Delhi HC sets aside bail granted to accused in Turkman Gate stone pelting case, orders reconsideration

Justice Prateek Jalan set aside the bail order, which was challenged by the Delhi Police. The bench said it was a case in which bail was granted by a cryptic and unreasonable order. It requires reconstruction.

On January 20, the Tis Hazari court granted regular bail to the accused, Md. Ubedullah, after noting that prosecution does not require the custody of the accused. He was sent in judicial custody on January 8.

Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Joginder Prakash Nahar granted bail to Md. Ubedullah is subject to certain conditions. The court said that, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the accused is entitled to bail.

"Accordingly, the applicant/accused Md. Ubedullah is granted bail on a personal bond of Rs 25,000 with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of Ld. JMFC/Link JMFC/Duty JMFC subject to the following conditions." ASJ Nagar ordered on January 20.

The court directed that the accused shall not enter a 50-meter radius around the victim/complainant's house. Other conditions have also been imposed.

Advocate A F Faizi, counsel for the accused, submitted that his residence is hardly 50 metres away from the place of the incident, and he has not committed any offence in the present case.

It was also submitted that the prosecution has filed the photo, claiming that the person seen in it is the accused. It is submitted on behalf of the accused that he is shown to be just near and outside his house. Hence, it is natural for the accused to be near his house.

Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Atul Shrivastava alongwith APP Gyan Chandra Soni, had opposed the bail application on the ground that it is required to be filed before the magistrate even when the attempt to murder (Section 109 BNS) is involved.

This submission was opposed by the counsel for accsued and submitted that the offence of attempt to murder is exclusively triable by a court of sessions.

The court had noted, "It is not in dispute that Section 307 IPC/Section 109(1) of BNS, 2023 contains the offence which is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions."

It was submitted on behalf of the accused that no video of this accused at any place other than the area near the house, nor any CDR, has come on record showing that this accused was in any manner involved in the offence.

It was also submitted that he is the sole bread earner of his family. He is the only son to look after his paralysed father, and medical prescription slips of his father are filed on record. The court had noted the submissions by APP for the state that this accused was involved under Section 149 IPC/190 of BNS.

"It is noted that police custody of this accused is not required. It is submitted for the accused that the accused will cooperate during the investigation and will observe the conditions granted for him," the court said in the order.

Delhi Police has lodged a case under sections 221, 132, 121, 191(2(3), 223(4), 109(1), 49, 3(5) BNS and section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act. An FIR is lodged at Police Station Chandani Mahal. (ANI)