Srinagar: The Court of Principal Sessions Judge in Bandipora district of Jammu and Kashmir on Friday rejected bail application of Farooq Ahmad Guddu, an accused in the infamous fake encounter killing of a civilian in 2006.
The accused was serving as Assistant Sub Inspector with J&K Police when he was arrested in 2006.
Farooq Guddu had sought bail on medical grounds in an FIR registered in Police station Sumbal Bandipora in 2006 under sections 302 (murder), 364(abduction), 120-B (criminal conspiracy) and 201(causing disappearance of evidence) of the Ranbir Penal Code.
Besides ASI Guddu, the other accused in the case include former Senior SSP H R Parihar, his deputy Bahadur Ram and police driver Farooq Ahmed Padroo.
While rejecting the bail application the Principal Session Judge, Bandipora Amit Sharma held that “any concession of bail either on medical ground or on other ground at this stage of the trial ( may) definitely shake the spine of the common man in the present dispensation of Criminal justice system”
“Hence the medical bail application moved by the accused person is rejected”, the court said.
Earlier the accused had approached the High Court with a bail application which in turn had asked the petitioner to approach the trial court for the bail and also directed the trial court to decide the application on its own merits and in accordance with the law.
The counsel of the petitioner submitted in Bandipora Court that he is seeking temporary bail on medical grounds purely on this ground that the present accused person is involved in three FIR’s No. 52/2006 ( Police station Sumbal), 04/2007 ( Police station Zadibal Srinagar) and 06/2007 ( Police station Batamaloo Srinagar) and he is suffering from hypertension, generalized weakness with LBA and chronic dermatitis.
In all the three FIRs, offences punishable under section 302 and 120-B IPC amongst other offences was invoked against the petitioner and various other persons arrayed as accused in the cases.
The counsel of the petitioner submitted that the court of Principal Session Jammu has already granted bail to the accused in two other FIRs and he has been detained in the present FIR.
“Therefore the bail which was granted by the court of Principal Session Jammu for short term has not been exercised due to his detention in the present FIR,” the counsel of the petitioner said.
The Public Prosecutor Abdul Majid opposed the grant of bail on the grounds that the medical record in the file dated back to 2021 and there is no fresh record from any quarter whatsoever to suggest the accused person is having any serious ailment which needs specialized treatment.
The PP argued there is no medical exigency evident from the record of the case, therefore on this count alone application deserves dismissal.
The court observed that one of the co accused Farooq Ahmed Padroo also approached the court which was rejected
“The evidence which is on record of the file against the said co-accused person is also identical in nature for consideration against the petitioner, who has approached before this court for short term bail,” the court observed.
The court observed that it is undisputed that the chargesheet in the present case was actually presented in the year 2013 and immediately after the committal of this challan the charge against the accused persons were framed on September 13, 2013.
The court said the only point for consideration in the present bail application is revolving around this point that the present accused is involved in three FIRs, and the concession granted to him has not been availed only because of his detention in the present FIR.
While rejecting the bail application , the trial court observed that all the accused persons involved in the FIR are police officers and officials and under the garb of police uniform such a fake encounter was committed, shaking the basic faith and confidence of the common man in the working of police.
Court said the deceased, who was working as a street vendor in Srinagar was killed in this encounter and he was actually the resident of the village of the accused.
UNI
About Author
