Petitioners, accused of murder conspiracy, remain in custody as court finds substantial evidence against them
In a significant ruling, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court has rejected the bail application of Basharat Ahmad Abbasi, alias Bashir, and another petitioner, who have been accused in a murder case dating back to January 2020. The petitioners sought bail after being in custody for over five years, claiming innocence and alleging a violation of their right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Presided over by Justice Sanjay Dhar, the court examined the evidence presented by the prosecution, including statements from witnesses and a recorded conversation from the deceased’s mobile phone. The case, registered under FIR No.02/2020 at Police Station Bijhama, Uri, involves charges under Sections 302 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which pertain to murder and criminal conspiracy, respectively.
The prosecution's narrative suggests that the deceased, Mohammad Syed Abasi, was poisoned after being lured to the residence of the accused under the pretense of resolving a love affair with Zahida Bano, a relative of the accused. Key evidence includes a dying declaration recorded via a phone conversation wherein the deceased implicated the petitioners and other accused individuals.
Justice Dhar emphasized the principles guiding bail decisions in serious offenses, underscoring the severity of the charges, the nature of the supporting evidence, and the potential threat to public safety should the accused be released. The judgment referenced established legal precedents, including those from the Supreme Court, which stress the need for courts to exercise discretion judiciously in bail matters, particularly when life imprisonment or the death penalty is possible.
The court also addressed the petitioners' claims of delayed trial due to the COVID-19 pandemic. It noted that while the pandemic initially hampered proceedings, the trial has since progressed at a reasonable pace with most witnesses already examined.
Despite arguments from the petitioners' counsel regarding contradictions in witness testimonies and forensic discrepancies, the court found enough prima facie evidence to substantiate the allegations against the accused. Consequently, the bail application was dismissed, with directions to expedite the trial.
This ruling underlines the judiciary's cautious approach in cases involving grave charges, ensuring that justice is served while safeguarding the rights of the accused within the constraints imposed by unforeseen circumstances like the pandemic.
Bottom line:-
Bail application under Sections 302 and 120B IPC rejected due to prima facie evidence against the accused, including recorded conversation of the deceased implicating the petitioners, and no violation of the right to speedy trial established.
Statutory provision(s): Sections 437, 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973; Sections 302, 120B of the Indian Penal Code; Section 32(1) of the Evidence Act, 1872; Article 21 of the Constitution of India
