The court rejected the second bail application moved by the applicant in a murder case, holding that the earlier rejection on merits was not superseded by a lack of substantial trial progress and absence of new grounds.
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. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. IInd BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11551 of 2018
Applicant :- Sayed Kamar Khushnoor Alias Sheru Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Khursheed Anwar Alvi,Bipin Lal Srivastava,Brajesh Kumar Solanki Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anup Kumar Pandey
Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.
This is the second bail application, moved on behalf of applicant seeking his release on bail in Case Crime No.331 of 2014, u/s 302, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station- Kotwali, DistrictGorakhpur. First bail application was rejected on merits vide order dated 16.01.2017.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.
Perused the record.
The only point pressed forth by the counsel for the applicant is that since the rejection of bail application the trial has not made any substantial progress, and therefore, the applicant should be released on bail on the point of detention. Learned counsel for the informant has informed that the evidence under section 313 Cr.P.C. is only left alone whereas all the witnesses have been examined.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.
Perusal of the earlier bail rejection order reflects that the merits of the case were considered in detail and after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, the co-ordinate Bench of this Court did not deem it a fit case where the accused could be released on bail. The trial is going on and the matter is within the realm of the trial court to adjudicate upon the guilt or innocence of the accused. There is no new good ground and therefore, the second prayer for bail of the applicant stands rejected .
However, it is expected that the trial court shall make all sincere endeavours to expedite the proceedings of the trial and conclude the same as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three months without granting unnecessary adjournment to either party.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned court for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 23.2.2021 shiv
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail on the ground that the trial has not made any substantial progress.
Whether there are any new grounds to allow bail after the first bail prayer was rejected on merits.
Sayed Kamar Khushnoor Alias Sheru
Gautam Chowdhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
