Bail application rejected; trial expedited to conclude within four months due to applicant's prolonged jail detention.
Bail declined; trial to be concluded within four months.
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. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 930 of 2020
Applicant :- Shreyansh Pandey @ Shubham Umang Pandey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Neeraj Singh,Amit Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri Neeraj Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on the record.
Applicant-Shreyansh Pandey @ Shubham Umang Pandey seeks bail in Case Crime No.106 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 506 I.P.C. and 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Jaitpura, District Varanasi.
According to the prosecution, the incident took place on 30.04.2018 at 9.30 a.m. and the F.I.R. was lodged on the same day at 1.27 p.m. against five accused persons including the applicant. In the F.I.R. specific role of firing has been attributed to the applicant which finds corroboration from the post mortem report.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the first informant PW 1, Sanni Yadav and PW 2, Sanjay Yadav, real brothers of the deceased, have not supported the prosecution case and have turned hostile., Thus the applicant, who is in jail for about more than a year, may be enlarged on bail during trial.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for the bail and submitted that in the charge-sheet there are two other eye-witnesses who are yet to be examined during trial and one of them is wife of the deceased. Therefore, the applicant being main accused is not entitled to be released on bail.
In the facts and circumstances of the case,I do not find any ground to consider the prayer for bail of the applicant. The prayer for bail is declined at this stage.
The application for bail is, hereby, rejected without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case.
However, considering the fact that applicant is languishing in
jail since 7.05.2018, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial of aforesaid case and conclude the same in accordance with law without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 14.1.2020
MN/-
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shreyansh Pandey @ Shubham Umang Pandey
State of U.P.
Rajul Bhargava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
