Attempted To Mislead The Investigation: Gujarat HC Denies Bail To Man Booked For Wife's Murder

The Gujarat High Court while denying bail to a man implicated in wife's murder noted that he attempted to mislead the investigation.

The Court was considering Bail Application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for offense under Sections 302, 201, 120(B), 34 and 177 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act.

The single-bench of Justice A.Y. Kogje observed, "The relevant consideration for this Court not to exercise discretion in favour of the applicant additionally is active attempt made by the applicant to mislead the investigation by filing initially complaint for missing person and thereafter also filing a petition for habeas corpus before this Court despite the fact that remains of the dead body were dug out from the place which the applicant himself had identified."

The Applicant was represented by Advocate Ashish M Dagli while the Respondent was represented by Additional Public Prosecutor Krina Calla.

The Counsel for the Applicant submitted that the applicant, aged 41 years was in jail since March 2019. It was submitted that the incident was alleged to have occurred in 2018 for which FIR was filed after 9 months. It was submitted that the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence and prima facie, there is no concrete material in the entire charge sheet to establish chain of circumstances against the applicant. He contended that out of total 81 witnesses more than 15 witnesses are yet to be examined and therefore, trial is likely to consume still more time.

It was submitted that almost all accused persons are now enlarged on regular bail by the Court and the Apex Court and hence, on the ground of parity also, case of the applicant deserves consideration.

The Additional Public Prosecutor objected to the Application and submitted that it was not only a case of brutal murder of wife of the present applicant, but also a case where the Applicant, with the assistance of other co-accused successfully misled investigating agency and that the entire offence was not even detected for period of one year and the accused persons claimed as if they are unaware of the whereabouts of Rukhsana and for that reason they filed a missing complaint and also writ of Habeaus corpus to misdirect the investigation. It was submitted that on the basis of statement of the witnesses, a direct nexus is drawn with the applicant and not only that, the FSL report did indicat the presence of bloodstain belonging to deceased-Ruksana found in the car used in the offence.

The Court after considering all the facts and material on record was of the view with an intention of creating a false evidence, the Applicant got a Missing Report registered with B-Division Police Station in this regard and tried to mislead the Police and thereby committed an offense under Section-177 of I.P.C. 

The Court remaked that it is on the Applicant to come out very clear from the charge-sheet papers while it concluded that attempts were made on his part to mislead the investigation.

Cause Title: Ismail Malo Husain Manjoti vs. State of Gujarat (2024:GUJHC:65333)

Click here to read/ download the Order: