Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

iqbal, and Others. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (U.P.).

iqbal, and Others. vs State of Uttar Pradesh (U.P.).

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Aug 02, 2010
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/912320

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Allahabad High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
BAIL No. - 5010 of 2010
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

[ALTAMAS KABIR; CYRIAC JOSEPH, JJ.] - Special Marriage Act, 1954 - Aggrieved by the orders passed by the learned Sessions Judge, the Respondent No.1 filed Criminal Application No.3034 of 2008 in the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the order dated 16th August, 2007 of the Judicial Magistrate, First C...

Key legal issue
Criminal
Acts & sections
Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 436, 304

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

iqbal, and Others.

Advocate Chandra Shekhar Sinha, Adv.

Respondent

State of Uttar Pradesh (U.P.).

Legal References

Acts
Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 436, 304

Excerpt

[altamas kabir; cyriac joseph, jj.] - special marriage act, 1954 - aggrieved by the orders passed by the learned sessions judge, the respondent no.1 filed criminal application no.3034 of 2008 in the high court under section 482 cr.p.c. challenging the order dated 16th august, 2007 of the judicial magistrate, first class, amravati and the order dated 2nd may, 2008 of the sessions judge, amravati. in the meanwhile, the respondent no.2 filed an application in misc. crl. application no.203 of 2007 in the court of the judicial magistrate, first class, amravati, praying for modification of its order dated 16th august, 2007 and a direction to the appellant to leave the house of respondent no.2. the said criminal appeal no.159 of 2008 was allowed by the learned sessions judge vide his judgment dated 15th july, 2009. the judgments and orders, both of the learned sessions judge, amravati, dated 15th july, 2009 and the nagpur bench of the bombay high court dated 5th march, 2010, in crl. writ petition no.588 of 2009 are set aside. consequently, the trial court shall also proceed against the said respondent nos.2 and 3 on the complaint filed by the appellant......to have reached inside the room where the deceased were said to be sleeping and was there any circumstance which had prevented the deceased persons to save themselves. the i.o., however, could not explain the above circumstances. 6. it is also submitted that the alleged eye witnesses of the incident have said that they had seen the applicants and other persons running in the light of the fire and as such they could not see the applicants igniting the fire. it is also pointed out that the i.o. has not shown, in the site plan of the place of occurrence, the place where the fire was lit by any of the miscreants. 7. learned a.g.a., however, opposed the bail. considering the above circumstances of the case and looking to the circumstance that all the dead bodies were found on one takhat, severity of punishment, reasonable apprehension of tampering the witnesses, prima facie satisfaction regarding proposed evidence and genuineness of the prosecution case, the applicants appear entitled to bail. 8. the application is, accordingly, allowed. 9. let applicants iqbal, riyasat and dhangu involved in case crime no. 93 of 2010, under sections 436 and 304 i.p.c. police station- gauriganj, districtsultanpur, be enlarged on bail on their executing personal bonds and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Full Judgment

1. Supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State and supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicants are taken on record. Pursuant to the order of this Court, the Investigating Officer of the case Shri Desh Raj Singh is present in person along with the case diary.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants pointed out that according to the averments of the F.I.R., the applicants and their associates, including two women, set the house of Ramzan on fire as a result thereof his three daughters, aged about 24,16 and 10 years and a six months old son of one Guddu died of burns.

4. The submissions of the learned counsel for the applicants are that the dead bodies of all the four persons are said to have been found on a wooden Takhat but it is highly improbable that none of the deceased girls, as a natural impulse, tried to save themselves or to save the infant from the fire and all of them died silently at one Takhat. It is also submitted that the postmortem reports of the deceased persons show the presence of superficial to deep burn injuries on almost all over the body of the dead persons and this circumstance makes the prosecution story unbelievable as such injuries could have occurred only when either the deceased had set himself on fire or he was set on fire by someone else with the help of any inflammable substance and such injuries could not be caused from the fire of the burning house.

5. The I.O. of the case was called upon to explain as to how the fire, which was allegedly lit to the thatch put on the outer side of the walls of the house, was found to have reached inside the room where the deceased were said to be sleeping and was there any circumstance which had prevented the deceased persons to save themselves. The I.O., however, could not explain the above circumstances.

6. It is also submitted that the alleged eye witnesses of the incident have said that they had seen the applicants and other persons running in the light of the fire and as such they could not see the applicants igniting the fire. It is also pointed out that the I.O. has not shown, in the site plan of the place of occurrence, the place where the fire was lit by any of the miscreants.

7. Learned A.G.A., however, opposed the bail. Considering the above circumstances of the case and looking to the circumstance that all the dead bodies were found on one Takhat, severity of punishment, reasonable apprehension of tampering the witnesses, prima facie satisfaction regarding proposed evidence and genuineness of the prosecution case, the applicants appear entitled to bail.

8. The application is, accordingly, allowed.

9. Let applicants Iqbal, Riyasat and Dhangu involved in Case Crime No. 93 of 2010, under sections 436 and 304 I.P.C. Police Station- Gauriganj, DistrictSultanpur, be enlarged on bail on their executing personal bonds and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial