Court No. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31484 of 2018 Applicant :- Kailash Gangwar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pratap Narain Gangwar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This application has been filed seeking prayer for bail on behalf of applicant- Kailash Gangwar, involved in Case Crime No. 88 of 2018, under Sections 8/20 N.D.P.S Act, P.S. Bisalpur, District- Pilibhit.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that necessary compliance under Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act has not been made.
Learned counsel for the applicant has fairly submitted that the trial in the present case has already started and witnesses of fact have already been examined. He has tried to refer to the prosecution evidence given during trial in order to show that the case for bail is made out.
Learned AGA for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant and has pointed out that that 2.130 gms of Charas has been recovered from the possession of the applicant which false in the category of commercial quantity.
After considering the submissions made at bar by learned counsel for the applicant and perusing the record, this Court is of the view that when the trial is already in progress, it shall not be proper to give any finding or pass any order on the merits of the case on the basis of the statements given in the Court.
The trial is already in progress and the accused should get the final verdict with regard to his innocence and guilt from the Trial Court on the basis of appreciation of evidence produced during the course of trial. Analyzing the testimonies and worthiness of the witnesses and making the judicial assessment of the same can be more appropriately done by the Trial Court.
Any finding or order passed by this Court on the merits of the case after assessing the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses produced during the course of trial might seriously prejudice the independent assessment of the evidence by the trial court, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that any observation made by this Court may cause prejudice to either side.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant at this stage. Accordingly, this bail application is rejected.
However, the Trial Court is expected to make all endeavours to dispose of the trial within a period of six months from the receipt of the certified copy of this order, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties and there is no other legal impediment in concluding the trial.
Order Date :- 30.1.2019 KU