High Court · 2025

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on the basis of false allegation, applicant has been made accused in the present matter and except evidence of CCTV Footage of the incident, there is no other evidence against him on record.

4. He further submits that admissibility and genuineness of the alleged CCTV Footage can only be ascertained by the trial court during trial.

5. He further submits that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 07.02.2020 i.e. for last more than five years and considering his long incarceration, a report was called from the court concerned about the current status of the trial, which is now on record and from its perusal it reflects that till date only six prosecution witnesses could be examined out of total eighteen prosecution witnesses of the charge-sheet and inspite of repeated summons, two witnesses Pappu Kumar and Babloo Kumar are not appeasing before the trial court and coercive measures are also being taken against them and therefore, it reflects that without any fault of the applicant, trial is being lingered on and considering the conduct of the prosecution witnesses, there is no hope of early disposal of the trial.

6. He further submits that right of speedy trial is the fundamental right of an accused and on its violation even in serious cases, he can be released on bail.

7. He further submits that there is no evidence, which can suggest that applicant caused any delay in trial and therefore, it cannot be said that his fundamental right of speedy trial has not been infringed.

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

9. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that applicant has been identified through CCTV Footage and therefore, it cannot be said that he is innocent but he could not dispute the fact that in the present matter applicant is jail for last more than five years and till date only six prosecution witnesses could be examined out of total eighteen witnesses of the charge- sheet and inspite of coercive measures two witnesses are not appeasing before the trial court.

10. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is having no criminal history to his credit.

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

12. However, as per allegation, applicant committed the murder of the deceased and this fact is evident from the CCTV Footage but except the evidence of CCTV Footage of the incident, there is no other evidence against him on record. This Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that admissibility and genuineness of the alleged CCTV Footage can only be ascertained by the trial court during trial.

13. Further, applicant is in jail in the present matter since

07.02.2020 i.e. for last more than five years and considering his long incarceration, a report was called from the court concerned about the current status of the trial and from its perusal, it reflects that till date only six prosecution witnesses could be examined out of total eighteen witnesses of the charge-sheet. Report of the trial court also suggests that , two witnesses are not appeasing before the trial court inspite of the coercive measures taken against them, therefore, it appears, trial of the case is moving with languid pace without any fault of the applicant and there is no hope of early disposal of the trial.

14. Further, right of speedy trial is the fundamental right of an accused and on its violation even in serious cases, he can be released on bail.

15. Further, considering the long incarceration of the applicant of more than five years, this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for applicant that it cannot be said that fundamental right of speedy trial of the applicant has not been infringed.

16. Further, applicant is having no 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- Nitin 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 :- 17.3.2025/Zafar MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on the basis of false allegation, applicant has been made accused in the present matter and except evidence of CCTV Footage of the incident, there is no other evidence against him on record.

4. He further submits that admissibility and genuineness of the alleged CCTV Footage can only be ascertained by the trial court during trial.

5. He further submits that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 07.02.2020 i.e. for last more than five years and considering his long incarceration, a report was called from the court concerned about the current status of the trial, which is now on record and from its perusal it reflects that till date only six prosecution witnesses could be examined out of total eighteen prosecution witnesses of the charge-sheet and inspite of repeated summons, two witnesses Pappu Kumar and Babloo Kumar are not appeasing before the trial court and coercive measures are also being taken against them and therefore, it reflects that without any fault of the applicant, trial is being lingered on and considering the conduct of the prosecution witnesses, there is no hope of early disposal of the trial.

6. He further submits that right of speedy trial is the fundamental right of an accused and on its violation even in serious cases, he can be released on bail.

7. He further submits that there is no evidence, which can suggest that applicant caused any delay in trial and therefore, it cannot be said that his fundamental right of speedy trial has not been infringed.

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

9. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that applicant has been identified through CCTV Footage and therefore, it cannot be said that he is innocent but he could not dispute the fact that in the present matter applicant is jail for last more than five years and till date only six prosecution witnesses could be examined out of total eighteen witnesses of the charge- sheet and inspite of coercive measures two witnesses are not appeasing before the trial court.

10. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is having no criminal history to his credit.

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

12. However, as per allegation, applicant committed the murder of the deceased and this fact is evident from the CCTV Footage but except the evidence of CCTV Footage of the incident, there is no other evidence against him on record. This Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that admissibility and genuineness of the alleged CCTV Footage can only be ascertained by the trial court during trial.

13. Further, applicant is in jail in the present matter since

07.02.2020 i.e. for last more than five years and considering his long incarceration, a report was called from the court concerned about the current status of the trial and from its perusal, it reflects that till date only six prosecution witnesses could be examined out of total eighteen witnesses of the charge-sheet. Report of the trial court also suggests that , two witnesses are not appeasing before the trial court inspite of the coercive measures taken against them, therefore, it appears, trial of the case is moving with languid pace without any fault of the applicant and there is no hope of early disposal of the trial.

14. Further, right of speedy trial is the fundamental right of an accused and on its violation even in serious cases, he can be released on bail.

15. Further, considering the long incarceration of the applicant of more than five years, this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for applicant that it cannot be said that fundamental right of speedy trial of the applicant has not been infringed.

16. Further, applicant is having no 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- Nitin 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 :- 17.3.2025/Zafar MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad