Union of India v. K.A. Najeeb reported in AIR

Applicant :- Satnam Singh @ Golu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Srivastava,Subham Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

1. Heard Sri Rahul Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned A.G.A.

2. The present applicant has been granted short term medical bail for 45 days vide order dated 19.9.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4856(B) of 2022 by Hon'ble Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh. The Second Bail Application No. 4950 (B) of 2023 has been rejected by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Karunesh Singh Pawar vide order dated 29.01.2024. This is the third bail application. Pursuant to the administrative order dated 23.9.2024 this bail application has been put up before the regular Court.

3. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is in jail since 3.7.2019 in Case Crime No. 155 of 2019 under Sections 302, 506, 120B/34 IPC & 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Ahirauli, District Ambedkar Nagar.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has pressed this bail application only on the ground that about 5 years and six months period have passed since the present applicant is in jail and out of total twenty witnesses all facts and relevant witnesses have been examined. Even some formal and expert witnesses have been examined which is clear from the status report dated 17.9.2024 filed by the learned trial court. Learned counsel has further submitted that looking into the pace of the trial there is no possibility to conclude the trial shortly, therefore, in view of the dictum of Apex Court in re; Union of India vs. K.A. Najeeb reported in AIR 2021 Supreme Court 712 and Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation passed in Criminal Appeal No.693 of 2021 (Arising out of SLP (Crl) No.3610 of 2020), the present bail application may be heard and disposed of finally. He has also stated that in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Balwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab & another passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. (s) 8523 of 2024 the applicant should be enlarged on bail.

5. Learned counsel has explained the criminal history of the present applicant in para no. 27 of the bail application. He has submitted that on account of present case there is one criminal history under the Arms Act and in another criminal history he has been enlarged on bail. Learned counsel has further submitted that if the present applicant is released on bail he shall abide by all rules and conditions.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the present applicant is cooperating with the trial proceedings and no unnecessary adjournments/ adjournments have been sought from his side. He has lastly submitted for the purposes of bail that in the given circumstances, there is no possibility of the trial to be concluded in near future. Therefore, in the light of the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in re; Union of India vs. K.A. Najeeb reported in AIR 2021 Supreme Court 712) and Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation passed in Criminal Appeal No.693 of 2021 (Arising out of SLP (Crl) No.3610 of 2020) wherein it has been held that if the accused person is in jail for substantially long period and there is no possibility to conclude the trial in near future, his bail application may be considered. Besides, he has referred the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in re; Gokarakonda Naga Saibaba v. State of Maharashtra, (2018) 12 SCC 505, wherein it has been held that if all fact/ material witnesses have been examined, the bail application of the accused may be considered. Learned counsel has submitted that in the present case, all fact/ material witnesses witnesses have been examined, therefore, the present applicant may be enlarged on bail. Learned counsel undertakes on behalf of the applicant that the applicant shall co-operate with the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court. Further, the applicant shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order.

7. Learned A.G.A has vehemently opposed the bail application by submitting that the present applicant is the main accused and the pistol which was used in committing the crime has been recovered on the pointing out of the present applicant. However, learned AGA has submitted that so far as the pace of the trial is concerned he has nothing to say but any appropriate order maybe passed in the interest of prosecution.

8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

9. Considering the fact that there is no possibility to conclude the trial in near future. In view of the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in re; K.A. Najeeb (supra) and Paras Ram Vishnoi (supra), the present case may be considered to grant bail to the present applicant. Besides, the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in re; Gokarakonda Naga Saibaba (supra) is also liable to be considered, which provides that if all fact witnesses and material witnesses have been examined then considering the period of incarceration of the present applicant in jail w.e.f. 3.7.2019, he may be granted bail.

10. Therefore, without entering into merits of the issue, the present bail application is allowed.

11. Let applicant- Satnam Singh @ Golu involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his 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 file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. (v)The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court. Before parting with, it is expected that the trial shall be concluded with expedition. Further, the learned trial court may take all coercive measures as per law if either of the parties do not co-operate in the trial properly. The learned trial court shall fix short dates to ensure that trial is concluded at the earliest. . [Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.] Order Date :- 6.1.2025 Om OM PRAKASH MISHRA OM PRAKASH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench

Applicant :- Satnam Singh @ Golu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Srivastava,Subham Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

1. Heard Sri Rahul Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned A.G.A.

2. The present applicant has been granted short term medical bail for 45 days vide order dated 19.9.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4856(B) of 2022 by Hon'ble Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh. The Second Bail Application No. 4950 (B) of 2023 has been rejected by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Karunesh Singh Pawar vide order dated 29.01.2024. This is the third bail application. Pursuant to the administrative order dated 23.9.2024 this bail application has been put up before the regular Court.

3. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is in jail since 3.7.2019 in Case Crime No. 155 of 2019 under Sections 302, 506, 120B/34 IPC & 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Ahirauli, District Ambedkar Nagar.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has pressed this bail application only on the ground that about 5 years and six months period have passed since the present applicant is in jail and out of total twenty witnesses all facts and relevant witnesses have been examined. Even some formal and expert witnesses have been examined which is clear from the status report dated 17.9.2024 filed by the learned trial court. Learned counsel has further submitted that looking into the pace of the trial there is no possibility to conclude the trial shortly, therefore, in view of the dictum of Apex Court in re; Union of India vs. K.A. Najeeb reported in AIR 2021 Supreme Court 712 and Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation passed in Criminal Appeal No.693 of 2021 (Arising out of SLP (Crl) No.3610 of 2020), the present bail application may be heard and disposed of finally. He has also stated that in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Balwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab & another passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. (s) 8523 of 2024 the applicant should be enlarged on bail.

5. Learned counsel has explained the criminal history of the present applicant in para no. 27 of the bail application. He has submitted that on account of present case there is one criminal history under the Arms Act and in another criminal history he has been enlarged on bail. Learned counsel has further submitted that if the present applicant is released on bail he shall abide by all rules and conditions.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the present applicant is cooperating with the trial proceedings and no unnecessary adjournments/ adjournments have been sought from his side. He has lastly submitted for the purposes of bail that in the given circumstances, there is no possibility of the trial to be concluded in near future. Therefore, in the light of the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in re; Union of India vs. K.A. Najeeb reported in AIR 2021 Supreme Court 712) and Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation passed in Criminal Appeal No.693 of 2021 (Arising out of SLP (Crl) No.3610 of 2020) wherein it has been held that if the accused person is in jail for substantially long period and there is no possibility to conclude the trial in near future, his bail application may be considered. Besides, he has referred the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in re; Gokarakonda Naga Saibaba v. State of Maharashtra, (2018) 12 SCC 505, wherein it has been held that if all fact/ material witnesses have been examined, the bail application of the accused may be considered. Learned counsel has submitted that in the present case, all fact/ material witnesses witnesses have been examined, therefore, the present applicant may be enlarged on bail. Learned counsel undertakes on behalf of the applicant that the applicant shall co-operate with the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court. Further, the applicant shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order.

7. Learned A.G.A has vehemently opposed the bail application by submitting that the present applicant is the main accused and the pistol which was used in committing the crime has been recovered on the pointing out of the present applicant. However, learned AGA has submitted that so far as the pace of the trial is concerned he has nothing to say but any appropriate order maybe passed in the interest of prosecution.

8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

9. Considering the fact that there is no possibility to conclude the trial in near future. In view of the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in re; K.A. Najeeb (supra) and Paras Ram Vishnoi (supra), the present case may be considered to grant bail to the present applicant. Besides, the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in re; Gokarakonda Naga Saibaba (supra) is also liable to be considered, which provides that if all fact witnesses and material witnesses have been examined then considering the period of incarceration of the present applicant in jail w.e.f. 3.7.2019, he may be granted bail.

10. Therefore, without entering into merits of the issue, the present bail application is allowed.

11. Let applicant- Satnam Singh @ Golu involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his 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 file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. (v)The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court. Before parting with, it is expected that the trial shall be concluded with expedition. Further, the learned trial court may take all coercive measures as per law if either of the parties do not co-operate in the trial properly. The learned trial court shall fix short dates to ensure that trial is concluded at the earliest. . [Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.] Order Date :- 6.1.2025 Om OM PRAKASH MISHRA OM PRAKASH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench