Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44023 of 2015 Applicant :- Kalyan Singh Patel Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Hari Pratap Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in S.T. No. 140 of 2007 arising out of Case Crime No. 326 of 2007, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302/341 I.P.C. and section 10/12 D.A.A. Act and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, P.S. Karvi, District-Chitrakoot and is in jail since 24.7.2007, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
This is the third bail application moved on behalf of the applicant. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that although the applicant is languishing in jail for the last 11 years but the trial has not made any progress. It is next submitted that 16 witnesses of fact in their evidence recorded before the trial court have nominated the applicant as accused but they have not assigned any specific role to him. Out of the 59 witnesses whom the prosecution proposed to examine for bringing home the charge claimed against the applicant, only 16 witnesses have been examined.The applicant has no criminal history and is languishing in jail since 24.7.2007 and he is entitled to be released on bail during pendency of the trial as there is no likelihood of conclusion of his trial in near future.
Per contra Smt. Manju Thakur, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that in the incident six police personnel were shot dead while 10 had received injuries. Considering the gravity of the offence the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail only on account having remained in jail for 11 years.
After having heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material brought on record, 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 to conclude the trial of the applicant within a period of one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties.
Subject to aforesaid direction, this bail application stands finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.7.2018 Manish Tripathi