High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 66 Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:149296 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31690 of 2023 Applicant :- Faizu @ Seebu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Srivastava,Ashok Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J. By means of the the bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 138 of 2022 at Police Station-Adampur, District-Varanasi under Sections 323, 304 and 392 I.P.C. The applicant is in jail since 26-11-2022.
Legal Reasoning
The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on 09-06-2023.
Legal Reasoning
The following arguments made by Shri Namit Srivastava, learned counsel holding brief of Shri Ashok Kumar, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned AGA-I from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail: 1. The applicant was not named in the F.I.R. 2. There is no direct evidence against the applicant. 3. This is a case of circumstantial evidence and the chain of incriminating circumstances against the applicant is not complete. 4. The applicant was nominated in the statement of the co- accused. The said statement in so far as it implicates the applicant is inadmissible in evidence. 5. Weapon which was used in the assault was recovered from the co-accused. 6. No incriminating article was recovered from the applicant. 7. The eye witness has also identified Hamid and Riaz as offenders who had inflicted injuries on the deceased. 8. The role of the applicant is distinguishable from all the principal offenders Hamid and Riaz. 9. Weapon of assault was recovered from offenders Hamid and Riaz. 10. The applicant is a law abiding citizen who cooperated with the police investigations and is prepared to join the trial proceedings. 11.The applicant never influenced witnesses and tampered with the evidence. 12. The trial is moving at a snail's pace and shows no sign of early conclusion. The applicant is not responsible for the delay in the trial. 13. Inordinate delay in concluding trial had has led to virtually an indefinite imprisonment of the applicant without there being any credible evidence to implicate him in the offence and violates the rights of the applicant to speedy trial. 14. The case of the applicant is distinguishable from the other accused persons. 15. The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case. 16. The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to cooperate with the court proceedings. There is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending. In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant- Faizu @ Seebu be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial. (ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, interest of justice will be served by directing the learned trial court to expedite the trial within a stipulated period of time. The trial court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of one year from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The learned trial court shall proceed with the hearing on a day to day basis to ensure that the above stipulated timeline of one year is strictly adhered to. All witnesses and counsels are directed to cooperate with the trial proceedings. The trial court has also to be conscious of the rights of the accused persons and is under obligation of law to ensure that all expeditious, necessary and coercive measures as per law are adopted to ensure the presence of witnesses. Counsels or parties who delay or impede the proceedings should not only be discouraged from doing so but in appropriate cases exemplary costs should also be imposed on such parties/ counsel. The learned trial court shall issue summons by regular process as per Section 62 Cr.P.C. and also by registered post as provided under Section 69 Cr.P.C. to expedite the trial. The learned trial court shall promptly take out all strict coercive measures against all the witnesses in accordance with law who fail to appear in the trial proceeding. Counsels or parties who delay or impede the proceedings should not only be discouraged from doing so but in appropriate cases exemplary costs should also be imposed on such parties/ counsel. The police authorities shall ensure that warrants or any coercive measures as per law taken out by the learned trial court to ensure that the attendance of the witnesses are promptly executed. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Varanasi shall file an affidavit before the trial court on the date fixed regarding status of execution of the warrants/service of summons taken out by the learned trial court. In case there is a failure on part of the police authorities to execute the warrants or other coercive measures, the Senior Superintendent of Police, Varanasi shall state the reasons for the same in the said affidavit and also show the steps taken to execute the warrants. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Varanasi shall simultaneously inform the Additional Director General of Police (ADG) Varanasi Zone, about the aforesaid failure of the police authorities in the first instance to execute the warrants and coercive measures issued by the learned trial court. If required, the Additional Director General of Police (ADG) Varanasi Zone, may issue an appropriate directions to ensure that the warrants issued are promptly executed by the learned trial court. The delay in execution of warrants and consequent absence of witnesses is one of the principal causes of delays in criminal trials and has to be addressed effectively by all stakeholders. The trial judge shall submit a fortnightly report on the progress of trial and the steps taken to comply with this order to the learned District Judge. A copy of this order be communicated to the learned trial judge through the learned District Judge, Varanasi by the Registrar (Compliance) by FAX. Order Date :- 26.7.2023 pks Digitally signed by :- PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad