Sushil v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
Third bail application rejected by Court No. 67, Farrukhabad, as trial was at an advanced stage with no factual recording remaining. Trial court directed to conclude trial within six months.
What the court decided
Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9589 of 2020
Applicant :- Sushil Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Navin Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard Shri Navin Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. Perused the record.
By means of the present third bail application the applicant Sushil is seeking bail in Session Trial No.58 of 2017 arising out of Case Crime no.330 of 2016, u/s 302, 307, 323 I.P.C., P.S.Nawabganj, District-Farrukhabad. First bail application was rejected vide order dated 20.2.2018 and second bail application was rejected on 15.5.2019.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that all prosecution witnesses of fact have been examined in the Court and they have not supported the prosecution case but the matter is pending since 2016 with no progress in the trial.
Keeping in view the fact that the trial is at advanced stage and all witnesses of fact have already been examined, this Court does not deem it fit and proper to enter into the details of the factual matrix of the case and pass any speaking order on the point of bail. I am not inclined to exercise my discretionary power in favour of the applicant. The third bail application, therefore, stands rejected.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Sushil
Coram
Rahul Chaturvedi
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · November
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/9589/2020
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court