IMPHAL, Jan 18: District and Sessions Judge Imphal East has reserved the judgement on the bail petition filed by United Naga Council (UNC) president and information secretary till tomorow.
Hearing of the bail petition filed by the arrested UNC president Gaidon Kamei and was listed in the session Court as Cril Misc (B) Case Number 2 of 2017 with reference to FIR Number 3 (11) 2016 Tadubi police station under Section 147/148/427/34 IPC.
The bail petition filed under Section 439 CrPC is listed as Investigating Officer versus Gaidon Kamei (52) s/o (L) Lundou Kamei of Noney Part 1 and Shangkhel Stephen (36) s/o (L) Shangkhel Thammok of Konsem village, Chandel district.
The two accused in their bail application stated that they are peace loving and law abiding persons having permanent addresses.
It also stated that Gaidon Kamei is a married person having three children while Shangkhel Stephen is unmarried staying with his family members.
Counsel of the accused, N Mahendra reminded the Court that the two UNC leaders were formally arrested on November 8 last year in connection with an FIR lodged in Tadubi police station for alleged commission of offences while they were produced before the Court of CJM Imphal East for hearing of another FIR filed against them.
The bail application also mentioned that the allegations levelled against the accused as contained in the FIR are false and concocted . The two accused have nothing to do with the alleged commission of offences. They were remanded to judicial custody and further remanded to police custody by an order passed by the Court of CJM Imphal East on December 14 last on the ground that there is a prima facie case against them. The offences against the accused as per the report in the FIR are all bailable offences, it stated.
It further contended that offences charged against the accused under Section 124-A and 153-A were added by the IO of the case without any basis and jurisdiction. The two UNC leaders have been falsely implicated in the cases. There is not an iota of evidence for justifying the false implication. No incriminating material has been recovered either from their possession or at their instance. During the course of investigation, nothing has been revealed to connect the accused with the alleged commission of offences, the bail application claimed.
It also mentioned that there is no reasonable apprehension that the accused persons might tamper with the evidences of the prosecution witnesses by their influence whereby the investigation/prosecution would be hindered and would not get a fair opportunity. After submission by the counsels of both the parties, the Court kept judgement of the bail application in abeyance.
Advocates Samom Ingen, Ch Bimolchandra, Salam Devananda and Thajamanbi assisted the PP of the State in the bail petition hearing.
Source: The Sangai Express