Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36931 of 2016 Applicant :- Ajay Raj Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pawan Singh Pundir,Manish Tiwary Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Deepak Dubey
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri Manish Tiwary, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Deepak Dubey, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on the record.
Applicant- Ajay Raj Singh seeks bail in Case Crime No.238 of 2015, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 I.P.C. and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station- Karchana, District- Allahabad.
Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant, his brother and father have been falsely implicated in this case. The prosecution version of indiscriminate firing by three named accused and two subsequently added accused is not supported by medical evidence, inasmuch as, both the deceased sustained one gunshot injury each, therefore, apparently the number of accused have been exaggerated. He further submits that the F.I.R. has come into existence after deliberations and consultations. It is next contended that in the trial all the witnesses of fact have been examined and there is no chance for the applicant to tamper with the prosecution witness, if enlarged on bail. Thus, the applicant, who is in jail since 12.6.2015, having no criminal antecedents to his credit, deserves to be enlarged on bail during trial.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have strongly opposed the prayer for the bail and submitted that it is a case of double murder and the prosecution version is fully supported by medical evidence. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case as also that it is a case of double murder, I do not find any ground to consider the prayer for bail of the applicant. The prayer for bail is declined at this stage.
The application for bail is, hereby, rejected without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case.
However, considering the fact that applicant is languishing in jail since 12.6.2015, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial of aforesaid case and conclude the same in accordance with law without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 27.2.2019 Vikas