news details |
|
|
| Involved in Attack on Mobile Magistrate Traffic Kathua | | Court rejected bail application of five accused persons | |
Jammu, Nov 23
Principal Sessions Judge Jammu Mr. Subhash Chander Gupta today rejected the bail application filed by accused Raghbir Singh, Dara Singh, Devinder Singh, Kuldeep Singh and Amrik Singh who are involved in attack on Mobile Magistrate Traffic Kathua, who were in police custody since November 1, 2006.
Mr. Subhash Chander Gupta Principal Sessions Judge Jammu in the detailed dismissal order of bail application in which Sr. Advocate UK Jalali appears for the petitioners and Public Prosecutor Mr. E A Tak appeared for the State and also perusal of the statement of Mr. Jasrotia, Mobile Magistrate Traffic Kathua and his Nazir Mohd Din and the statement of other witnesses amply demonstrate that while Mr. Jasrotia was holding the Court on spot in his vehicle near Pir-Baba Kharote Morh, the accused persons encircled the jeep, assaulted the Magistrate and caused damage to the vehicle in which the Magistrate was holding the Court, attempted to snatch the cash and receipt book from the Nazir. The statement of witnesses do not rests here, but it further demonstrate that number of drivers, President and Secretary of the Union namely Kuldeep Singh and Amrik Singh shouted slogans and collected mob of 1000 to 1500 persons by making telephonic calls to the mob, who gathered on spot and said that why the magistrate is checking traffic from 8 to 10 hours daily and if he continued checking from 8 to 10 hours daily he would be crushed by running over the vehicle.
In the wake of these statements of the witnesses, Court further observed that the act of the accused is dictating the terms as to how long Magistrate to hold his Court is required to be discouraged and curved further act of the accused persons in gathering the mob and assaulting the Court is a serious matter, cannot be brushed aside lightly by the mere fact that the accused are in custody for more than 20 days by passing the nature and seriousness of the case in which the assault has been made on the Court and the Court has not been allowed to function for a considerable time and the release of accused on bail at this stage will have a direct bearing on the smooth functioning of the other mobile Courts in the state and like minded persons will be encouraged. Apart from this many other accused are yet to be arrested. The authority cited by the advocate appearing for the petitioners does not help the petitioner as in the authority cited, it has been held that the transfer of possession of property however transient, is an essential ingredient of offence of theft but in the case in hand the petitioners along with other accused had tried to snatch the cash and receipt book which is an attempt and constitute offence u/s 382/511 RPC, which is a non-bail offence.
Court looking to the acts of the accused in assaulting and disrupting the function of the Court attempt to snatch cash and receipt book after collecting mob by making telephonic calls from the spot, dictating terms to hold Court, sacred institution, on spot for one or half an hour are the peculiar and special circumstances that deter the Court to release the accused on bail involved in offence u/s 382/511 RPC which is non-bailable as such this application for bail is rejected and dismissed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
