'Nothing To Show His Involvement In Incident': Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To Shahi Jama Masjid Head In Sambhal Violence Case

The Allahabad High Court last week granted bail to Zafar Ali, the Chairman of Shahi Jama Masjid Committee (in Sambhal), in connection with the violence that took place on November 24 last year during the court-ordered survey of the mosque to determine whether a temple existed at the premises. A bench of Justice Sameer Jain noted that from the perusal of the material collected during the investigation, it could not be inferred that he also participated in the alleged incident."It appears, as he was Chairman of Sambhal Jama Masjid Committee, therefore, as per prosecution, he was instrumental for the agitation and thus, during investigation, he has been made accused in the present matter but from the record, it could not be reflected that he also participated in the alleged incident dated 24.11.2024," the bench noted. The Court also added that the prosecution could not provide any material based on which it could be inferred that the applicant prima facie appears to have committed the offences under Sections 230 and 231 BNS, which were added later."...there is no admissible evidence against the applicant with regard to the offences under Sections 230, 231 B.N.S., as during the course of argument, learned A.G.A. could not place any material on the basis of which, this Court can infer that applicant prima-facie appears to have been committed the offences under Sections 230, 231 B.N.S.," the bench said. Briefly put, the FIR was lodged against co-accused Zia-Ur-Rahman Barq, Suhail Iqbal, and 700-800 unknown persons, alleging that during an Advocate Commission survey on November 24, the nominated accused persons, along with 700-800 unknown persons, created a hurdle in the survey and started agitating. It was alleged that the mob damaged public property, including police vehicles, and the incident resulted in injuries to police officials and damage to government vehicles. Before the court, counsel for the accused submitted that on March 23, the IO gave notice to the applicant under Section 179 BNSS. When the applicant appeared before him, he was arrested, and after recording his statement, he was made an accused in the present matter. The bench was further apprised that initially, the FIR contained offences punishable with a maximum punishment of seven years, but during the investigation, offences under Sections 230 and 231 BNS were added, with the maximum punishment being life imprisonment. It was argued that these offences are not made out against the applicant, as there is no cogent evidence against him that he either gave or fabricated false evidence with the intent to procure the conviction of a capital offence. On the other hand, the AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that, being Chairman of the Sambhal Jama Masjid Committee, he was instrumental in the violent agitation of the mob. However, he could not dispute that the applicant was not named in the FIR and that there was no evidence suggesting that he also participated in the alleged incident. He further could not dispute the fact that although offences under Sections 230 and 231 BNS were also added during the investigation, there is no admissible and cogent evidence against the applicant on record. It was also admitted that the investigation of the case has already been concluded, a charge sheet has been filed, and the applicant has been in jail since March 23, i.e., for the last four months. Against this backdrop, the Court took into account that co-accused Zia-Ur-Rahman Barq, alleged to be the principal accused, had not been arrested after the Division Bench had disposed of his writ petition in light of Arnesh Kumar case, since all offences at that time were punishable up to seven years. Subsequently, the Court noted that more serious offences under Sections 230 and 231 BNS, carrying life imprisonment, were added during the investigation. However, the Court found no admissible evidence against the applicant under these sections, except for 'bald' and 'verbal' allegations. It also noted that co-accused Suhail Iqbal was found falsely implicated, and a final report was submitted in his favour. Thus, noting that the applicant has been in jail since March 23, and the charge sheet was already filed, the Court granted him bail.Case title - Zafar Ali vs. State of U.P. 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 275Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 275Click Here To Read/Download order

'Nothing To Show His Involvement In Incident': Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To Shahi Jama Masjid Head In Sambhal Violence Case

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags