Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20919 of 2018 Applicant :- Tejveer Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Inder Pal Singh Tomar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Heard Sri Inder Pal Singh Tomar, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant - Tejveer with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. - 365 of 2017, under Section - 302 I.P.C., Police Station - Simbhawali, District - Hapur, during pendency of trial.
3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, at present:
(i) the applicant is accused of murder, punishable with imprisonment upto life;
(ii) against FIR lodged on 29.09.2017, the applicant is in confinement since 23.10.2017;
(iii) the applicant claims to have cooperated in the investigation. In any case he is not shown to have unduly evaded arrest;
(iv) as to criminal history, it has been submitted that though the applicant was involved in certain cases, however, he has been enlarged on bail in those cases as also he has never been found violating the terms of those bail orders;
(v) chargesheet has already been submitted, trial has commenced. However, there is no hope of early conclusion of the trial;
(vi) on prima facie basis, only it may be noted, according to the applicant, the trial is at an advanced stage, however, learned counsel for the applicant would submit that it was a case of suicidal hanging, which had been closed by the police. However, on account of political animosity, the then gram pradhan made a complaint after one and a half month of the occurrence to the SSP and on that basis only, an FIR came to be registered giving rise to the present prosecution. Further, all witness of fact have been examined but the trial has yet not been concluded and the applicant has been confined for more than two years. Also, reference has been made to the statement of the doctor examined at trial to submit that the death of the victim was suicidal and not homicidal;
(vii) in any case, no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, without making any observation as may affect the outcome of the trial, it appears more than reasonable time has passed and the trial has yet not concluded. At the same time, the applicant has remained confined for more than two years, and all witness of fact have been examined. Therefore, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressuring the witness, during the investigation or trial.
(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
5. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, the bail being granted shall be cancelled.
6. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
7. Also, the learned court below shall make all efforts to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from today, keeping in mind the principle contained in Section 309 Cr.P.C.
Order Date :- 27.11.2019 Abhilash