Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7649 of 2015 Applicant :- Sonu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Kumar Singh,Arvind Kumar,Mayank Yadav,Suresh Chandra Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt.Advocate
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A. G. A. for the State.
This bail application has been moved by the applicant before this Court for being enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 561 of 2014, under Section-304 I. P. C., P. S.- Khekhara, district-Baghpat.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the F. I. R. of the incident was lodged by the cousin brother of the deceased, Amit alleging that on 26.9.2014 at about 6.00 P. M the applicant along with two other unknown persons had taken away his brother from his house and at about 9.30 P. M. when the informant was returning to his house from market, he saw the applicant stabbing the deceased Amit with a screw driver and on his raising alarm, a huge crowd gathered there, on which the applicant had fled away from the place of occurrence leaving the deceased in a seriously injured condition, who was taken to the hospital where he was declared dead. He next submitted that there is variance between the prosecution story as set up by the informant in the F. I. R. and the facts of the case narrated by the deceased's father in his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr. P. C. in which he also stated that the applicant along with two other persons had taken away his son Amit but his son was brought to his home in an injured condition by two unknown persons. He has further submitted that in view of the aforesaid inconsistencies the applicant, who has no criminal antecedents to his credit and is in jail since 28.10.2014, is entitled to be released on bail.
Learned A. G. A. has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the father of the deceased is not the eye-witness of the occurrence and the eye- witness of the occurrence was not interrogated. The post mortem report of the deceased fully corroborates the prosecution version as regards the manner of assault stated in the F. I. R, hence the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.
After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the F. I. R., I am not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail.
However, considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 28.10.2014, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the applicant as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four months from the date of production of certified copy of this order without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties, if there is no legal impediment.
Subject to the aforesaid observations, this application stands disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 23.2.2018 HR