The Single Judge rejected the second bail application of Saddeeq @ Jalil, who had been in jail for five years. The court held that no ground for bail was made out but directed the trial court to conclude the trial expeditiously to serve the ends of justice.
Bail rejected; direction issued to trial court to conclude trial expeditiously.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 43
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17467 of 2014
Applicant :- Saddeeq @ Jalil Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sapan Kumar Singh,Hemant Kumar Dubey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J.
This is the second bail application. The first bail application has been rejected on 5.8.2013.
It is stated that the applicant is in jail for the last five years and the trial is still pending.
I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.
I am of the view that no ground is made out for the grant of bail. Accordingly, the bail is rejected.
Having due regard to the facts of the case, in my view, the ends of justice would be subserved by issuing a direction upon the trial court to conclude the trial expeditiously.
Order Date :- 3.1.2018 Digamber
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail given the pendency of the trial and encashment of bail application grounds.
Saddeeq @ Jalil
Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
