AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioners seek bail in Siwan Town P.S. Case No.
297 of 2016 dated 15.04.2016 instituted under Sections
147 / 148 / 149 / 188 / 153A / 295 / 295A / 353 / 307 / 332 / 333 / 427 / 435 / 109 / 120B
of the Indian Penal Code.
This is the second attempt of the petitioners for bail as
earlier such prayer was rejected by order dated 15.06.2016 in Cr. Misc.
No. 25287 of 2016.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that after
the order of rejection, two similarly situated accused namely, Ajay
Prasad and Rajesh Kumar, have been granted bail by a co-ordinate
Bench of this Court on 24.06.2016 in Cr. Misc. No. 25221 of 2016.
The Court would only like to observe that the co-ordinate Bench was
persuaded on the stand taken on behalf of the said petitioners which is
recorded as under:
"Petitioners are said to be owner of D.J. sound system which had been played at the time of procession of Ramnawmi. The claim of the prosecution is that members of both community pelted stones on each others as well as police officials but it is surprising enough that members of only one community were made accused in this case. Moreover, no specific overt-act has been attributed against the petitioners, who are languishing in jail custody since long."
The above observation is the contention recorded on
behalf of the said petitioners before the Court which appears to be
totally incorrect, inasmuch as 9 members of one community and 22 of
another community were made accused. The Court is constrained to
observe that a patently false submission was made before the Court by
Mr. Vijay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners in Cr.
Misc. No. 25221 of 2016. The situation is worse in view of the fact that
Mr. Kanhaiya Kishore, learned A.P.P. also do not point out the correct
position before the Court. Such position is really unfortunate where
learned counsel, who are officers of the Court, try to obtain an order
based on submissions which are totally wrong on facts and learned
counsel who are supposed to represent the State also keep quiet and do
not point out the falsity submitted before the Court. Such being the
position and also the fact that the order passed by this Court dismissing
the bail application of similarly situated co-accused i.e., the present
petitioners, prior to the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench and such
order not being brought to the notice of the co-ordinate Bench, this
Court does not find that the present petitioners can take any advantage
of the same.
In view thereof and also taking into account the reasons
recorded in the earlier order dated 15.06.2016 in Cr. Misc. No. 25287
of 2016, as also the fact that except for efflux of time, no mitigating
circumstances after the passing of the order dated 15.06.2016, having
been brought to the notice of the Court, no case is made out to grant
bail to the petitioners.
Accordingly, the application stand dismissed.