In this second bail application, the High Court rejected the request to enlarge the applicant on bail in a murder case. The court found the applicant to be a main shooter with eyewitness accounts and noted no new grounds were presented.
Bail application rejected. Directives issued to District Magistrate and SSP to ensure witness presence.
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. - 51 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. 2nd BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1005 of 2018 Applicant :- Rakesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ghan Shyam Das,Sri Kamal Krishna Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kamlesh Kumar Dwivedi
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today in the Court, is taken on record.
Heard Sri Kamal Krishna, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Sri Ghan Shyam Das, at great length, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Kamlesh Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the complaint and Sri Yogeshwar Rai, learned AGA appearing for the State.
This is a second bail application moved on behalf of applicant praying to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.363 of 2015(S.T. No.503 of 2016), under Sections 302, 506, IPC, Police Station Jagdishpura, District Agra.
This is the second bail application moved on behalf of the applicant. The first bail application was rejected on 20.03.2017.
The counsel for the applicant has pressed this second bail application solely on the ground that till date the trial has not yet been concluded and the witnesses are not appearing before the court concerned.
Perusal of record shows that no subsequent development or new ground has been brought on record. The applicant is main shooter. Specific role of firing has been assigned to the applicant. Eye witness account is present, hence, no case for grant of indulgence is made out.
In view of the above, no case for grant of any indulgence is made out. Accordingly, the bail application is hereby rejected.
However, it is being made clear that in case the witnesses are not appearing before the court concerned, inspite of the non-bailable warrant, the District Magistrate and the SSP concerned are directed to ensure the presence of the witnesses before the court concerned.
Order Date :- 17.5.2019/VKG
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the second-time applicant who is the main shooter in a murder case where the trial is inconclusive.
Whether the court ought to direct witnesses to appear despite the prior rejection of bail applications.
Whether the failure to conclude the trial constitutes a special cause for granting bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rakesh
State Of U.P.
Vipin Sinha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
