Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31215 of 2017 Applicant :- Moti Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rang Nath Pandey,Rabindra Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard S/Sri Rang Nath Pandey and Rabindra Tiwari, 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-Moti Yadav in Case Crime No.15 of 2011, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452, 307, 302/34 I.P.C., 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act and 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Colonelganj, District-Allahabad with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
This is third bail application on behalf of the applicant. The first bail application was rejected by Hon'ble A.K.Tripathi, J. by an order dated 23.5.2012 on merits. The Court while rejecting bail application had observed that though in the F.I.R. general role of firing was assigned to the applicant along with two other co-accused and some unknown accused but subsequently, in the statement of witnesses specific role has been assigned to the applicant and co-accused, Ashish Yadav alias Nate of causing firearm injury to the deceased. Thereafter, bail application on behalf of applicant was filed on the ground of delay in trial and that the applicant is languishing in jail since 12.1.2011. The second bail application was also rejected by the same Bench with the direction to the trial court to expedite the trial and conclude it expeditiously without unreasonable delay and unnecessary adjournment, preferably within six months by an order dated 1.4.2016.
It is stated by learned counsel for the applicant that said order was filed in the trial court on 28.5.2016 as the same is reflected from the certified copy of the order-sheet. He has also argued that despite specific direction of this Court to conclude the trial within six months, the trial is still pending on account of the fact that the case property i.e. Katta that was used by the applicant in the commission of crime, has not been produced by the prosecution. It is next submitted that the deceased had sustained four firearm injuries which indicates that besides the applicant, other accused had also resorted to firing. He has further submitted that examination-in- chief of PW 3, Ashish Kumar was recorded on 30.8.2016 and his cross- examination continued for about one and half years, no other witness has been examined till date. There is no early prospect of conclusion of trial. Lastly, it is contented that the applicant, who is in jail since 12.1.2011 which works out to be more than seven years and three months, deserves to be released on bail.
Per contra, learned AGA 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-Moti Yadav 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.
The trial court is also 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, strictly in compliance of provisions of Section 309(1) Cr.P.C. on day-to-day basis, 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.
Order Date :- 25.4.2018 MN/-