1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

Paplu @ Ajay Chauhan vs State Of U.P.

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|30 March, 2012


Heard Sri Brij Raj Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
This is the second application for bail on behalf of the applicant Paplu @ Ajay Chauhan involved in case crime no.1387 of 2007 under section 2/3 U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 and sections 304, 506 IPC, pertaining to police station Kotwali, District Mainpuri.
The first application for bail was rejected on merits vide order dated 10.8.2009 passed by Hon'ble Vijay Kumar Verma, J. (since retired).
As a fresh ground, it is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail since 25.6.2007 and up to now, not a single prosecution witness has been examined during trial. Even after rejection of the first bail application, the trial lingered on unnecessarily and the charge could be framed only on 8.6.2010, though on almost each and every date, the accused was present in Court in custody. Even subsequent to the framing of the charge, not a single witness has been produced by the prosecution and the trial is being held as a mere formality.
This is a very sorry state of affairs. When an accused is in custody, it is the duty of the prosecution to ensure that the witnesses are produced in Court most expeditiously and and only in extra ordinary circumstances, the prosecution must seek adjournment. Similarly, the trial court has to take control of proceedings before it and if the case is being unnecessarily delayed by the prosecution, the trial court must issue coercive process against the witnesses and must take suitable action against defaulty police machinery.
A person cannot be detained as an under trial for an indefinite period. The applicant has already spent a period of about 4 years and 9 months in jail and the end of the trial is nowhere in sight. It is a fundamental right of every prisoner to have his case decided expeditiously. Any infringement of such a right would entitle him to obtain bail.
Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that in view of long detention of the applicant in jail without any progress in trial, he is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant Paplu @ Ajay Chauhan involved in aforesaid crime be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned concerned with the following conditions :
(a) The applicant shall attend the court according to the conditions of the bond executed by him ; and
(b) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
Order Date :- 30.3.2012 ss
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.

Paplu @ Ajay Chauhan vs State Of U.P.


High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

30 March, 2012
  • S C Agarwal