Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7233 of 2016 Applicant :- Gurdayal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Udai Karan Saxena,Akhilesh Chandra Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pankaj Sharma Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J.
Heard Sri Gopal Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Prashant Vyas, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Raghuraj Kishore, learned counsel for the informant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the material on record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 382 of 2015, under Sections 452, 307, 302, 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station T.P. Nagar, District Meerut, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused, Neeraj and Mohit, who have been assigned same role in the first information as the applicant, have been granted bail by another Single Judge of this Court vide orders dated 22nd May, 2017 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8716 of 2017 (Neeraj versus State of U.P.) and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 32701 of 2016 (Mohit versus State of U.P.) and thus in view of the above, the applicant is in jail since 3rd September, 2015 and is entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.
Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that after lodging of the first information report, the informants had filed an affidavit before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Meerut stating therein that co-accused Mohit and Neeraj were not involved in the said case and on the date of incident Mohit was present in Jaipur Rajasthan and hence the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity.
After having heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material brought on record, I am of the view that the consideration which weighed with another Single Judge while granting bail to the co-accused Neeraj and Mohit under the fats and circumstances of the case is not applicable to the case of the applicant. The case of the applicant is clearly distinguishable. Therefore, I am not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail at this stage of trial. The prayer for bail is refused.
However considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the trial court is directed the conclude the trial of the applicant within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties. In case the trial of the applicant is not concluded within the period stipulated hereinabove, the applicant may move fresh bail application before this Court.
Subject to aforesaid direction, this bail application stands finally disposed of.
(B.K. Narayana, J.) Order Date :- 30.3.2018 Sushil/-