Home Allahabad High Court Allahabad High Court rejects bail application of the gangster Atique Ahmad’s brother in murder case

Allahabad High Court rejects bail application of the gangster Atique Ahmad’s brother in murder case

Allahabad High Court rejects bail application of the gangster Atique Ahmad’s brother in murder case
Want create site? Find Free WordPress Themes and plugins.

The Allahabad High Court has rejected the bail application of Mohammad Ashraf alias Khalid Azim, real brother of the dreaded criminal, gangster and Bahubali, Atique Ahmad, in the murder case of two people in Dhoomanganj police station area in 2015.

A Single Bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Bail Application filed by Mohd Ashraf @ Khalid Azeem.

The application under Section 439 CrPC has been filed seeking bail in Case under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 120-B and 504 IPC, Police Station Dhoomanganj, District Allahabad.

As per the allegations in the FIR, that on 25.9.2015 at 8.30 PM the complainant Mohd Abid was going on a Fortuner Car to the Village of Surjeet, Driver, and as soon as he reached near culvert situate at Madarsa, seven named accused in the FIR, because of old enmity, started firing at the vehicle of the complainant and as a result of firing, two persons were killed.

The accused-applicant was not named in the FIR. Charge sheet was filed against the named accused. However, in further investigation, the name of the accused-applicant and thirteen other accused came to the light for committing the gruesome murder of two persons in a dare devil and gruesome manner.

The post-mortem reports of the deceased would disclose multiple firearm injuries on them. The accused-applicant is the real brother of the dreaded criminal, gangster and Bahubali, Atique Ahmad, who has to his credit more than hundred cases registered for committing the heinous offences. The accused-applicant is not only the brother of the dreaded criminal and bahubali, but he himself is a hardened criminal and gangster.

Very recently, the accused-applicant has been named in another heinous offence of murder of Umesh Pal, the main witness in the murder of case of Raju Pal, a sitting Member of Legislative Assembly.

Umesh Pal and two police security personnel have been killed in broad daylight allegedly in a criminal conspiracy of the accused-applicant and his brother near his house by firing multiple gun shots on Umesh Pal and his two security personnel.

In respect of the murder of the star witness and his two security officers, an FIR has been registered on 25.2.2023 bearing under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 506, 34 and 120-B IPC, Section 3 of the Explosive Substances Act and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act at Police Station Dhoomanganj, District Prayagraj against the accused-applicant and other accused.

Preeti Devi, wife of the deceased Surjeet who got killed in the offence, filed Criminal Misc Writ Petition before the Court and the Court order dated 30.5.2017 disposed of the said petition with direction to the State authorities to take all suitable steps for proper, free and fair investigation of the offence.

During investigation, from the statements of the witnesses, Ebne Ahmad, Israr Ahmad and eye witness Aftab Jumma, Afzal and other evidence collected, the name of the accused-applicant came to the light along with other accused persons. The allegation against the accused-applicant is of hatching criminal conspiracy for committing the murder of two innocent persons. In the statement of the witnesses, Munnu, Jalru Hasan they had said that the accused-applicant was involved in conspiracy for committing the crime.

In the supplementary charge sheet filed under Section 173(8) CrPC, the conclusion was arrived that the named accused persons have not committed the crime in question and the persons named in the supplementary charge sheet had committed the offence.

The Court noted that,

It is further stated that brother of the accused-applicant, Mafia Don Atique Ahmad with an intention to give undue benefit in the Village Panchayat election to co accused Abid could succeed to lodge the FIR against his rivals namely, Intekhan and others. It is the accused-applicant and his brother who hatched criminal conspiracy for committing the crime in question.

The accused-applicant absconded and after completing the proceedings under Section 82/83 CrPC, charge sheet was filed. The accused-applicant had absconded himself for a long period of time and a reward of Rs 50,000/- was announced on his arrest. However, even after a reward of Rs 50,000/-, he could not be arrested and the reward on the arrest of the accused-applicant was enhanced to Rs 1,00,000/-.

“The criminal history of the accused-applicant would disclose that on seven occasions, the order under Section 174-A IPC was passed and his freedom would jeopardise the lives and properties of the witnesses and would be a peril to the law abiding and peace loving citizens. The long, inglorious and rich criminal history of the accused-applicant would suggest that he had committed another offence after he had come out of jail in the previous offence. The offences allegedly committed by him are very serious and, therefore, such a person cannot be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. Even otherwise, the parity is not an absolute ground to enlarge a criminal on bail, who is having more than fifty cases of heinous offences to his credit.

It is well settled law that while considering the bail application of an accused, nature and gravity of offence, accusations, his criminal antecedents, societal impact of the crime, evidence and material available against the accused are to be considered.

Having considered all the relevant factors and the criminal history, I am of the view that the accused-applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail”, the Court observed while rejecting the bail application.

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.