Delhi HC grants bail to accused after 10 years of custody in terror case

He has been already granted bail in two others cases in Rajasthan's cities of Jaipur and Jodhpur. He is a resident of Jaipur Rajasthan.

Division bench of Justice Prathiba M Singh and Dharmesh Sharma granted bail to Maroof.

While granting bail, the High Court noted that the material relied upon by the Prosecution in the present case is almost the same as the material in the Jaipur/Jodhpur FIRs. This position is not disputed by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor (APP).

"The Appellant has already been released on bai in the other two cases. Considering the above long period of incarceration, the Court is inclined to grant bail to the Appellant, upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs10,000 and two sureties in the like amount each, subject to the following conditions," the High Court ordered on January 15.

The High court has imposed conditions including that Maroof shall not leave the country without permission of the court.

Mohd. Maroof had moved an appeal against the order dated 2nd May, 2024 passed by the Special judge at Patiala House New Delhi. His bail application was dismissed by the trial court.

Advocate M S Khan alongwith Advocates Prashant Prakash, Qausar Khan and Rahul Sahani appeared for appellant.

The main ground of the appeal is that there were three FIRs registered and he has been released on bail in the other two cases by the Rajasthan High Court and Supreme Court respectively.

It was argued by Advocate M S Khan that three chargesheets have been filed based on the same material facts, which is impermissible in law.

It was further argued that the trial in this case is likely to take a long time to decide, considering that there are more than 220 witnesses cited by the prosecution and out of them only 62 witnesses have been examined.

The period of long incarceration was also a contention. It was contended that the Appellant has been in custody for more than ten years.

It was also submitted that out of the total persons who were accused in the subject FIR, ten accused had pleaded guilty and in all those cases, the sentence that has been awarded is the period already undergone by the Appellant.

If the Appellant is found to be guilty, the period of sentence would not be more than the ten years which the latter has already undergone. Thus, considering the period of incarceration, the Appellant is entitled to bail, the cousnsel argued.

On the other hand, APP Ritesh Bahri argued that there is serious charges and substantial material against the Appellant that he was planning a terror attack in Bharatpur, Rajasthan and he had also collected arms, explosives, etc for the said purpose.

He also argued that the Appellant was in continuous touch through email, with one Riaz Bhatkal who is a known terrorist who was involved in the Hyderabad and Delhi blasts. (ANI)