Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5845 of 2015 Applicant :- Awadhu Yadav @ Ram Awadh Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- R.P.S. Yadav,S.K. Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,V.K.S.Kushwaha And Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15255 of 2015 Applicant :- Vinod @ Yashwant Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- R.P.S. Yadav,S.K. Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,V.K.S. Kushwaha
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Since both the cases arise out of same case crime number, they are being decided by this common order.
Heard Sri S.K. Sharma, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri V.K.S. Kushwaha, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on the record.
Applicants- Awadhu Yadav @ Ram Awadh Yadav and Vinod @ Yashwant Yadav seek bail in Case Crime No.299 of 2013, under Sections 302, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 3/25 of Arms Act, Police Station- Bhurkhura, District- Ghazipur.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case by the first informant. The applicant no.1 is the father of applicant no.2. The alleged incident is said to have taken place in the dark hours of night and on account of previous enmity applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that co-accused from whom the Katta which was allegedly used in the commission of murder was recovered has already been granted bail. Therefore, the applicants, who are in jail since 25.4.2014, may be enlarged on bail during trial.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for the bail and submitted that the F.I.R. was lodged promptly within four and half hours of the incident. There is reliable eye-witness account and the version of firing by the applicants on the deceased finds full corroboration from ante-mortem injuries noted in the postmortem report. Postmortem report reflects that deceased sustained several firearm injuries. Lastly, it is pointed out that both the applicants have been convicted under Sections 302, 120-B I.P.C. and till date all witness of fact and formal witnesses have been examined and the trial of applicants is on the verge of conclusion. Therefore, the applicants are not entitled to be enlarged on bail.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the specific role attributed to the applicants, I do not find any ground to consider the prayer for bail of the applicants. 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 are languishing in jail since 25.4.2014, 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 on day to day basis 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 :- 21.1.2019 Vikas