INDORE: In a stunning turn in the case where two minors and an 18-year-old were arrested for allegedly spitting on a Mahakal Sawari procession in Ujjain, the complainant and witness have turned hostile, with the complainant even denying the contents of the FIR. The Indore bench of Madhya Pradesh high court referred to this and granted bail to Adnan Mansuri, the lone adult among the accused, who was 18 at the time.He spent over five months in jail.
In his judgment, Justice Anil Verma observed: “Complainant Sawan Lot and eyewitness Ajay Khatri have been examined before the trial court and they both have turned hostile and not supported the case of the prosecution. The applicant (Adnan) is a permanent resident of Ujjain and the final conclusion of the trial is likely to take a long time. Under the above circumstances, prayer for grant of bail may be considered.” The administration had razed allegedly “illegal portions” of Adnan’s ancestral house on July 19, two days after the complaint was filed against him. Ujjain civic officials and police arrived with JCB machines and tore it down, as drummers played. Justice Verma granted bail to Adnan on December 15, 151 days after he was arrested along with two 15-year-old boys on charges of allegedly spitting from the terrace of a building at a procession of Lord Mahakal near Tanki Square.
On the complaint of Sawan, an Indore resident who was participating in the procession, Ujjain’s Kharakuan police charged the boys under IPC sections 295A (deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings), 153A (offence committed at a place of worship), 296 (disturbing religious assembly), 505 (statements conducing to public mischief) and common intention.
Adnan’s counsel, Vivek Singh, told the court that he was innocent and had been falsely implicated. The chargesheet has already been filed and there is no reason to keep him behind bars, he argued.
Government counsel Varsha Singh Thakur, arguing against bail, said the applicant was identified from CCTV footage and it was a “serious case relating to communal harmony”. He does not deserve bail, she told the court.
Justice Verma noted that Sawan had not only turned hostile but also “denied his relevant portion of his FIR”. The investigating officer did not conduct an identification parade and Adnan does not have any criminal background, the judge observed. “Without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail upon a personal bond of Rs 75,000, with one solvent surety in the like amount,” he said, ordering Adnan to present himself in court for trial whenever asked.
In his judgment, Justice Anil Verma observed: “Complainant Sawan Lot and eyewitness Ajay Khatri have been examined before the trial court and they both have turned hostile and not supported the case of the prosecution. The applicant (Adnan) is a permanent resident of Ujjain and the final conclusion of the trial is likely to take a long time. Under the above circumstances, prayer for grant of bail may be considered.” The administration had razed allegedly “illegal portions” of Adnan’s ancestral house on July 19, two days after the complaint was filed against him. Ujjain civic officials and police arrived with JCB machines and tore it down, as drummers played. Justice Verma granted bail to Adnan on December 15, 151 days after he was arrested along with two 15-year-old boys on charges of allegedly spitting from the terrace of a building at a procession of Lord Mahakal near Tanki Square.
On the complaint of Sawan, an Indore resident who was participating in the procession, Ujjain’s Kharakuan police charged the boys under IPC sections 295A (deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings), 153A (offence committed at a place of worship), 296 (disturbing religious assembly), 505 (statements conducing to public mischief) and common intention.
Adnan’s counsel, Vivek Singh, told the court that he was innocent and had been falsely implicated. The chargesheet has already been filed and there is no reason to keep him behind bars, he argued.
Government counsel Varsha Singh Thakur, arguing against bail, said the applicant was identified from CCTV footage and it was a “serious case relating to communal harmony”. He does not deserve bail, she told the court.
Justice Verma noted that Sawan had not only turned hostile but also “denied his relevant portion of his FIR”. The investigating officer did not conduct an identification parade and Adnan does not have any criminal background, the judge observed. “Without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail upon a personal bond of Rs 75,000, with one solvent surety in the like amount,” he said, ordering Adnan to present himself in court for trial whenever asked.