Court No. - 48
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36684 of 2017 Applicant :- Pradeep Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjeev Kumar,Deepak Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karuna Nand Bajpayee,J.
This second bail application has been filed seeking the release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.03 of 2017, u/s 376, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station-Mandi Dhanaura, District-J.P. Nagar (Amroha). First bail application has been rejected vide order dated 6.4.2017 on merits.
Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. Perused the record.
Submission of counsel for the applicant is that the trial has already commenced and the prosecution witnesses produced in the court have not supported the prosecution case and have turned hostile, and therefore, the applicant should be released on bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that it is demonstrably clear that attempt is being made on the part of the accused side to placate the witnesses and tamper with prosecution evidence as a result of which the witnesses have turned hostile. Submission is that if the accused shall be released on bail even the remaining chances of a fair trial shall be lost beyond redemption and as the trial is already in progress, any order by this Court after considering the details of the merits of the case is fraught with the risk to cause serious prejudice to the trial.
I have considered the submissions raised at the bar and perused the record in the light of the same.
Keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of this case and also keeping in view the fact that the trial is already progressing and witnesses are being examined, this Court does not deem it fit to enter into the details of the factual merits of the case and pass any speaking order on that basis on the point of bail. The matter is within the realm of the trial court now and the accused should get the final verdict with regard to his innocence or guilt from the trial court itself on the basis of thorough appreciation of evidence produced in the trial. This Court, therefore, abstains to pass any detailed order on merits on the point of bail at this stage of the trial, lest it may cause prejudice to either side. Suffice it to say that the case diary and other record disclose enough material to make out prima facie case against the accused and there is enough material to substantiate the charge.
Moreover, as earlier bail application has already been rejected by the preceding Bench on merits, I do not see any adequate good fresh ground on the basis of which the prayer for bail may be reconsidered and granted. The second bail application, therefore, stands rejected.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
Order Date :- 30.4.2018 M. Kumar