Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20888 of 2017 Applicant :- Shiva Kant Gupta Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Manu Sharma,Dinesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mumtaz Ali,Prakash Chandra Srivastava,Shad Khan
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shad Khan, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Om Narain Tripathi, learned A.G.A. assisted by Sri S.C. Dwivedi, Sri Bhanu Prakash Singh and Sri Jitendra Kumar, learned Brief Holders for the State and perused the material available on record.
By way of the instant application, the applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.93 of 2016, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 307, 302 and 506 I.P.C. , Police Station Kotwali, District - Maharajganj.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that general allegations have been made in the first information report against all the accused and in the statement of the prosecution witnesses under Section - 161 Cr.P.C., role of the applicant along with another co-accused- Santosh Gupta was deliberately spelt and was almost procured by the police. Specific role was assigned to the applicant and co-accused- Santosh Gupta of firing from their respective weapons. The applicant is a law abiding citizen and in case, he is admitted to bail, there is no possibility of his absconding or misusing the liberty of bail. The applicant is cooperating in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail on several grounds and submitted that specific testimony appears against the applicant, whereby the allegations made have been substantiated.
Sri Shad Khan, learned counsel for the informant has vehemently claimed that in this case, the testimony against the present applicant is specific and direct and his role along with the role of co-accused- Santosh Gupta has been specified with precision, therefore, the case of the applicant cannot be said to be vague or dubious. However, he pointed out that the bail application of Santosh Gupta on the same ground was also considered by coordinate bench of this Court previously on 16.11.2017, wherein also all these facts have been considered and order has been passed.
Considered the rival submissions, perused the material brought on record and the enormity of the offence. No good ground is made out for bail.
Consequently, the instant bail application is rejected at this stage.
However, it has been intimated that at this juncture, the trial is in progress and that only the formal witnesses are to be examined and the witnesses of fact for the prosecution have already been examined.
Under the facts and circumstances, it is directed that the trial court should ensure speedy trial of the case and shall not occasion any unnecessary delay and keeping in view the convenience of its roster, may dispose of this case preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
It is made clear that observation, if any made in this order shall have no bearing on the ultimate merits of the case.
Order Date :- 25.7.2019 S Rawat