9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Application for anticipatory bail in a case involving FIR u/s 302/120B/34 IPC and Arms Act.
Summary: 1. The prosecution alleged a conspiracy leading to the murder of a shop owner. The complainant identified potential suspects and narrated the incident where the victim was shot dead in his shop. 2. The defense argued that the petitioner was not present at the scene and no direct evidence linked him to the murder. The prosecution relied on inadmissible disclosure statements and belated witness statements. 3. The prosecution contended that the petitioner conspired to hire assassins for the murder. Confessional statements and previous conduct of the petitioner were highlighted as evidence. 4. The court noted that the murder was a retaliatory act, suspected due to a previous death in the petitioner's family. The involvement of hired criminals was outlined based on disclosures and witness statements. 5. Referring to legal precedents, the court emphasized the need for careful evaluation of evidence, especially in cases involving conspiracy charges under IPC Sections 34 and 149. 6. The court observed that the evidence against the petitioner primarily relied on disclosure statements of co-accused. Lack of substantial evidence led to the grant of anticipatory bail, with conditions for the petitioner to cooperate in the investigation.
|
