Bhola Singh Yadav and Another v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
A High Court judge rejected a bail application in a murder case involving the accused, noting that five witnesses were examined but formal witnesses remained. The judge directed the trial court to expedite the trial within six months.
What did the court decide?
Bail application rejected; trial court directed to conclude trial within six months.
What the court decided
Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 67 of 2019
Applicant :- Bhola Singh Yadav And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
By means of this application, the applicants who is involved in case crime no.0198 of 2017, under Sections 302 and 201 IPC, Police Station-Jhunsi, District-Allahabad, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that five witnesses have been examined in the present case and only formal witnesses are left to be examined. The applicant is languishing in jail since 17.11.2017.
Under these circumstances, keeping in view the fact that five witnesses have been examined, I do not find any good reason to grant indulgence to the applicant at this stage.
Thus, the bail application stands rejected .
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the applicant in a murder case where five witnesses have been examined and formal witnesses remain.
Whether the trial court's delay justifies granting bail under Section 437 CrPC.
What direction should be issued to the trial court for speeding up the trial proceedings.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Bhola Singh Yadav
Coram
Rahul Chaturvedi
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · February
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/67/2019
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court