Court No. - 48
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. SECOND BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10215 of 2018 Applicant :- Gaffar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Nazrul Islam Jafri Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jamaluddin Mohd. Nasir
Hon'ble Karuna Nand Bajpayee,J.
This second bail application has been filed seeking the release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 28 of 2016, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Saroorpur, District Meerut. The first bail application was rejected by this Court on 8.3.2017 on merits.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. Perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the trial has already commenced and a number of prosecution witnesses have already been examined. It was also pointed out that some of the witnesses have not supported the prosecution case and, therefore, the applicant should be released on bail. It was also pointed out that some of the co-accused persons have been released on bail by other Benches of the Court.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.
Perusal of the earlier bail rejection order shows that merits of the case have also been gone into by the Court and the most incriminately distinguishing feature against the applicant was the long criminal history of more than two dozen of criminal cases registered against him. It goes without saying that on that basis itself the case of the applicant stands distinguishable from other co-accused, who are admittedly according to the counsel, not having any such long criminal history of bad antecedents. Apart from this it is also clear from perusal of the orders passed with regard to co-accused that the factum of present applicant's rejection of bail has not been considered by another Bench of the High Court. Moreover, as it is also clear that the trial has already commenced, therefore, the matter is within the realm of the trial court and the accused should get the final verdict with regard to his innocence or guilt from the trial court itself on the basis of thorough appreciation of evidence produced in the trial and any order passed by this Court on merits after assessing the testimonies of prosecution witnesses produced in the trial court might seriously impair the independent dispassionate assessment of the trial court. This Court, therefore, abstains to pass any detailed order on the point of bail on that basis at this stage of the trial, lest it may cause prejudice to either side. Suffice it observe that there is sufficient evidence available against the applicant and in the wake of long criminal history of the accused he does not deserve bail. It may also be pointed out the fact that some of the witnesses have turned hostile, is an indication that in case the applicant is released on bail remaining chances of a fair trial shall get lost beyond redemption. In view of the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not see any good ground to release the applicant on bail.
In the aforesaid background, the second bail application stands rejected.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
Order Date :- 26.9.2018 CPP/-