Tapas Kumar Palit v. State of Chhattisgarh Criminal Appeal No

Gunjan Sharma, High Court Legal Services Committee.

2. The instant second application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.122 of 2022, under Sections 363, 323, 376-AB, 307 I.P.C. and Sections 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Lalauli, District Fatehpur, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his fist bail application has been dismissed on merit vide order dated 30.11.2023 and he is pressing the instant second bail application on the ground that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 12.05.2022 i.e. for last more than two and half years and till date trial of the case could not be concluded.

4. He further submits that considering the long incarceration of the applicant, a report was called from court concerned about the current status of the trial, which is on record and from its perusal, it reflects, till date only five prosecution witnesses could be examined out of total eleven in the charge-sheet. He further submits, from the report of the court concerned, it reflects, inspite of coercive measures, witness H.M. Ram Shiromani is not appeared before the trial court and therefore, it appears, there is no hope of early disposal of the trial and trial is being lingered on without any fault of the applicant.

5. He further submits that applicant is in jail for last more than two and half years, therefore, it cannot be said that his fundamental right of speedy trial has not been infringed.

6. He further submits that applicant is having no previous criminal history to his credit.

7. Per contra, learned AGA, learned counsel for the informant and learned counsel for the High Court Legal Services Committee opposed the prayer for bail and submit that this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application was dismissed after considering the fact that applicant is about fifty five years old person and victim was hardly five years of age and her medical report also suggests that she was sexually assaulted but they could not dispute the fact that in the present matter applicant is jail for last more than two and half years and till date only five prosecution witnesses could be examined out of total eleven in the charge-sheet.

8. They further could not dispute the fact that one prosecution witness H.M. Ram Shiromani inspite of coercive measures is not appearing before the trial court.

9. They further could not dispute the fact that all the witnesses of facts have already been examined and applicant is having no previous criminal history to his credit.

10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

11. However, this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his fist bail application has been dismissed after considering the merit of the case vide order dated

30.11.2023 but it reflects, applicant is in jail in the present matter since 12.05.2022 i.e. for last more than two and half years and till date trial of the case could not be concluded. Considering the long incarceration of the applicant, a report was called from court concerned about the current status of the trial and from its perusal, it reflects, till date only five prosecution witnesses could be examined and therefore, considering the fact that in the charge-sheet there are eleven prosecution witnesses, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no hope of early disposal of the trial, cannot be ruled out.

12. Further, record also suggests that all the witnesses of facts have already been examined and therefore, there is no chance of any tampering with the prosecution evidence, if applicant will be released on bail.

13. Further, from the report of the court concerned, it also reflects that one prosecution witness H.M. Ram Shiromani inspite of coercive measures is not appearing before the trial court.

14. Further, right of speedy trial is a fundamental right of an accused and on its violation even in serious cases, he can be released on bail. [See: Tapas Kumar Palit Vs. State of Chhattisgarh Criminal Appeal No.738 of 2025, arising out of SLP (Criminal) No.15971 of 2024 order dated 14.02.2025].

15. Further, considering the fact that applicant is in jail for last more than two and half years, it cannot be said that his fundamental right of speedy trial has not been infringed.

16. Further, applicant is having no previous criminal history to his credit.

17. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

18. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

19. Let the applicant- Shatrughan Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

20. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

21. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 27.2.2025/Zafar MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Gunjan Sharma, High Court Legal Services Committee.

2. The instant second application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.122 of 2022, under Sections 363, 323, 376-AB, 307 I.P.C. and Sections 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Lalauli, District Fatehpur, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his fist bail application has been dismissed on merit vide order dated 30.11.2023 and he is pressing the instant second bail application on the ground that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 12.05.2022 i.e. for last more than two and half years and till date trial of the case could not be concluded.

4. He further submits that considering the long incarceration of the applicant, a report was called from court concerned about the current status of the trial, which is on record and from its perusal, it reflects, till date only five prosecution witnesses could be examined out of total eleven in the charge-sheet. He further submits, from the report of the court concerned, it reflects, inspite of coercive measures, witness H.M. Ram Shiromani is not appeared before the trial court and therefore, it appears, there is no hope of early disposal of the trial and trial is being lingered on without any fault of the applicant.

5. He further submits that applicant is in jail for last more than two and half years, therefore, it cannot be said that his fundamental right of speedy trial has not been infringed.

6. He further submits that applicant is having no previous criminal history to his credit.

7. Per contra, learned AGA, learned counsel for the informant and learned counsel for the High Court Legal Services Committee opposed the prayer for bail and submit that this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application was dismissed after considering the fact that applicant is about fifty five years old person and victim was hardly five years of age and her medical report also suggests that she was sexually assaulted but they could not dispute the fact that in the present matter applicant is jail for last more than two and half years and till date only five prosecution witnesses could be examined out of total eleven in the charge-sheet.

8. They further could not dispute the fact that one prosecution witness H.M. Ram Shiromani inspite of coercive measures is not appearing before the trial court.

9. They further could not dispute the fact that all the witnesses of facts have already been examined and applicant is having no previous criminal history to his credit.

10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

11. However, this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his fist bail application has been dismissed after considering the merit of the case vide order dated

30.11.2023 but it reflects, applicant is in jail in the present matter since 12.05.2022 i.e. for last more than two and half years and till date trial of the case could not be concluded. Considering the long incarceration of the applicant, a report was called from court concerned about the current status of the trial and from its perusal, it reflects, till date only five prosecution witnesses could be examined and therefore, considering the fact that in the charge-sheet there are eleven prosecution witnesses, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no hope of early disposal of the trial, cannot be ruled out.

12. Further, record also suggests that all the witnesses of facts have already been examined and therefore, there is no chance of any tampering with the prosecution evidence, if applicant will be released on bail.

13. Further, from the report of the court concerned, it also reflects that one prosecution witness H.M. Ram Shiromani inspite of coercive measures is not appearing before the trial court.

14. Further, right of speedy trial is a fundamental right of an accused and on its violation even in serious cases, he can be released on bail. [See: Tapas Kumar Palit Vs. State of Chhattisgarh Criminal Appeal No.738 of 2025, arising out of SLP (Criminal) No.15971 of 2024 order dated 14.02.2025].

15. Further, considering the fact that applicant is in jail for last more than two and half years, it cannot be said that his fundamental right of speedy trial has not been infringed.

16. Further, applicant is having no previous criminal history to his credit.

17. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

18. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

19. Let the applicant- Shatrughan Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

20. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

21. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 27.2.2025/Zafar MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad