Court No. - 43
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17914 of 2015 Applicant :- Rashid Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Brham Singh,Shashi Kant Pandey,Zafar Abbas Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J.
Supplementary affidavit annexing therewith up-to-date copy of the order sheet is taken on record.
Heard Sri Zafar Abbas, learned counsel for applicant - Rashid and the learned A.G.A in connection with Case Crime No.223/2013 (S.T. No.805/2013) (State vs. Rashid and others), under Sections 302/506/34 IPC, P.S. Katghar, Moradabad.
This is the 2nd bail. Considering the heinous nature of allegations that the applicant slight the throat of the deceased in the presence of named witnesses coupled with the fact that 3 prosecution witnesses of fact are yet to be examined as well as no new ground is made out, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail, merely on the ground that the applicant is in jail since 14.6.2013.
The bail application stands rejected.
Learned counsel for the applicant then states that an outer limit be fixed for expeditious disposal of the trial.
The Constitution Bench (7 Judges) of the Apex Court in P. Ramachandra Rao v. State of Karnataka, 2002(4) SCC 578, which has been followed in Niranjan Hemchandra Sashittal V. State of Maharashtra, 2013(4)SCC 642, has held that courts should not fix outer limit for trial.
However, the court concerned is directed to expedite the trial to its logical conclusion, as expeditiously as possible, under intimation to this Court. It is made clear that court below would not grant unnecessary adjournments, adjournments, if any, shall be for strong and compelling reasons, else would attract exemplary cost.
Order Date :- 26.7.2018 Chandra