'Second FIR After 22 Years Not Proper': Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To Mukhtar Ansari's 'Aide' In 2001 Usri Chatti Murder Case

A bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi thus allowed Sarfaraz Ansari @ Munni's bail application, taking into account that an FIR regarding the same incident had already been lodged in 2001, the investigation had been completed, a charge sheet had been submitted and the trial of the case is ongoing.

Briefly put, an FIR was lodged in January 2023 alleging that the informant's son (Manoj Kumar Rai) had been killed by Mukhtar Ansari and his accomplices on 14 July 2001.

The informant stated that due to Mukhtar Ansari's terror, he remained silent for many years and only after Ansari ceased to be an MLA in 2022 and his son was declared an absconder, he could disclose 'true facts' of the incident to the police.

Although the applicant was not named in the FIR, his role surfaced during the investigation from witness statements. An eyewitness assigned him the role of catching hold of the deceased while attributing the act of firing to another accused.

The State and complainant opposed the bail plea on the ground that the explanation for the delay in lodging the FIR was justified and that the offence was heinous in nature.

The defence, however, pointed out that the applicant was himself an injured witness in the 2001 case, had suffered a gunshot injury, and had been examined as a prosecution witness in that trial.

It was also argued that the State was conducting two different prosecutions regarding the same incident based on two different FIRs, which was not proper.

Reliance was placed on the Supreme Court's ruling in Sumdeh Singh Saini v. State of Punjab 2021, in which bail was granted to the accused in a case where an FIR was lodged 29 years after the incident.

Taking note of these circumstances, the Court observed:

"…keeping in view the fact that the first information report of the incident was already registered with the police in the year 2001 itself; it does not appear proper that a second first information report of the same incident was registered after 22 years; more particularly that the investigation on the first information report already stands concluded and the prosecution has already submitted a charge-sheet on the basis whereof an investigation is going on; the informant is an injured prosecution witness in the first information report from which trial is continuing after the charge-sheet submitted by the informant and that the applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 15.07.2023, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail".

Accordingly, the Court allowed the bail application and directed that the applicant be released on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

He has been directed not to tamper with evidence, not to pressurise witnesses and to regularly appear before the trial court.

The Court also clarified that the observations made in the order would not affect the merits of the case.

Advocates Siddharth Sinha and Mohammad Taha Chishti appeared for the applicant.

Additional Advocate General VK Shahi, assisted by AGA Alok Tiwari, appeared for the State.

Advocate Brij Mohan Sahai appeared for the complainant