Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29873 of 2016 Applicant :- Kalu @ Intzar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Virendra Kumar Yadav,Akhilesh Singh,Pankaj Bharti Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri Pankaj Bharti, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Kalu @ Intzar in Case Crime No. 598 of 2009, under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station- Budhana, District- Muzaffar Nagar with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant was enlarged on bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide an order dated 27.8.2010 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.23592 of 2010. The applicant was continuously attending the trial, however, on 10.12.2015 on account of unforeseen circumstances he could not appear before the court and non-bailable warrant was issued for his arrest and when he came to know about the warrant, surrendered before the court on 27.5.2016. It is argued that examination-in-chief of PW-1 has been done, however, he is not turning up and bailable warrant has been executed against him. It is further submitted that the applicant is in jail for about 2 years and 9 months after his surrender. There is no early prospect of conclusion of trial. So, the applicant, who is in jail since 27.5.2016, deserves to be released on bail.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not point out anything material to the contrary.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant- Kalu @ Intzar be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions that:-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;
2. The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;
3. The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the courts below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of the applicant.
However, considering the fact that the alleged incident is of the year 2009, 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 six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment. The court below shall be at liberty to adopt all coercive steps for securing the attendance of the witnesses.
Order Date :- 27.2.2019/ Vikas