Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38698 of 2018 Applicant :- Sunil Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mahesh Chand,Dushyant Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri Mahesh Chand & Sri Dushyant Singh, learned counsels for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.261 of 2011, under Sections 302 & 307 IPC, Police Station Dankaur, District Gautam Budh Nagar with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is argued that co-accused O.P. alias Opendra has been granted bail by an order dated 4.10.2013 and the case of applicant also stands at par with that of co-accused against whom role of firing has been attributed, and, therefore, on the ground of parity the applicant may also be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the bail prayer and submitted that the present incident took place in the year 2011 and the applicant remained absconding for about more than six years. It is further argued that on account of abscondence of the applicant, his trial was separated by the Trial Judge and the murder case remained held up for so many long years. So far as the ground of parity is concerned, the bail of co-accused was allowed in the year 2013 and at this stage, especially that the applicant remained absconding for more than 6-7 years, he cannot get the benefit of parity. It is further argued that the incident took place in a broad daylight, in which the applicant and other co-accused are alleged to have resorted to indiscriminate firing and the deceased sustained eleven firearm wound of entries and exit.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find it to be a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant.
The bail application is accordingly rejected.
It transpires that the trial is old one, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, on day to day basis, strictly in accordance with the provisions of Section 309(1) Cr.P.C., preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of a certified copy of the order.
Let a copy of this order be sent to concerned Court below for intimation and necessary compliance within a week.
Order Date :- 30.10.2018 Hasnain