KANPUR: Additional district and sessions judge, Vinay Kumar Singh, on Saturday rejected the bail applications of Adil and Mustaqeem, the accused in the recent Babupurwa riot case. Police had charged them under sections 147/148/149/332/353/336/307/188/427/34/109 of the IPC and also under section 3/4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, the Arms Act and the Criminal Law Amendment Act.
Moving Adil’s bail application, his mother Shaheen claimed that his son had falsely been implicated in the case. She stated in her affidavit that on December 19-20, 2019, as there was a marriage of one of her relations, the relatives and family members were staying at Bagahi Eidgah ground to guard marriage articles. While Adil and other relatives were removing the articles, a stampede took place in the area and her family members and some young boys stayed there at the Eidgah.
After some time, the police entered the Eidgah and caught Adil and framed him in riot and other charges, she stated in her affidavit. In support of her claim, she submitted a marriage card and claimed that the police had neither any proof nor any video clip which could show that Adil had indulged in the violence. Moreover, there was no recovery of any arm or ammunition from Adil and that he has no criminal record.
Mustaqeem’s mother Afroz, who moved his bail application too took the plea of marriage in her house held at Eidgah ground. She also pleaded that following a stampede taking place at the Eidgah, the police reached there and arrested Mustqeem.
Opposing the bail applications, ADGC Shiv Bhagwan told the court that on December 20, 2019, after the namaz was over, the accused along with other co-accused started hurling petrol bombs, acid bombs and the bottles containing acids at the police party due to which the body protectors, cane shields, helmets and vehicles were damaged and then the police had used force on the order of the magistrate.
The prosecution stated that around a dozen cops had suffered injuries. Moreover, the accused and the co-accused had burnt the motorcycles of the police. The field unit collected empty shells of 12 bore and 315 bore cartridges and bottles used in petrol and acid bombs, and the accused and the co-accused were arrested from the spot, the prosecution alleged.
The court went through the evidence on record and the police report in which they had claimed that charges under section 302 of the IPC had also been added against the accused.
The court said that under those circumstances and after considering the evidence oral and documentary, there was no ground to grant bail to the accused and hence the bail applications of the two accused were being rejected. The bail applications of two other co-accused Shahzad and Parvez Alam had already been rejected earlier.
Moving Adil’s bail application, his mother Shaheen claimed that his son had falsely been implicated in the case. She stated in her affidavit that on December 19-20, 2019, as there was a marriage of one of her relations, the relatives and family members were staying at Bagahi Eidgah ground to guard marriage articles. While Adil and other relatives were removing the articles, a stampede took place in the area and her family members and some young boys stayed there at the Eidgah.
After some time, the police entered the Eidgah and caught Adil and framed him in riot and other charges, she stated in her affidavit. In support of her claim, she submitted a marriage card and claimed that the police had neither any proof nor any video clip which could show that Adil had indulged in the violence. Moreover, there was no recovery of any arm or ammunition from Adil and that he has no criminal record.
Mustaqeem’s mother Afroz, who moved his bail application too took the plea of marriage in her house held at Eidgah ground. She also pleaded that following a stampede taking place at the Eidgah, the police reached there and arrested Mustqeem.
Opposing the bail applications, ADGC Shiv Bhagwan told the court that on December 20, 2019, after the namaz was over, the accused along with other co-accused started hurling petrol bombs, acid bombs and the bottles containing acids at the police party due to which the body protectors, cane shields, helmets and vehicles were damaged and then the police had used force on the order of the magistrate.
The prosecution stated that around a dozen cops had suffered injuries. Moreover, the accused and the co-accused had burnt the motorcycles of the police. The field unit collected empty shells of 12 bore and 315 bore cartridges and bottles used in petrol and acid bombs, and the accused and the co-accused were arrested from the spot, the prosecution alleged.
The court went through the evidence on record and the police report in which they had claimed that charges under section 302 of the IPC had also been added against the accused.
The court said that under those circumstances and after considering the evidence oral and documentary, there was no ground to grant bail to the accused and hence the bail applications of the two accused were being rejected. The bail applications of two other co-accused Shahzad and Parvez Alam had already been rejected earlier.
Trending Topics
LATEST VIDEOS
More from TOI
Navbharat Times
Featured Today in Travel
Get the app