Dismissed

Laxmikant v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Aug 2023BAIL/15610/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court rejected the second bail application of an accused in a case involving grave assault. The court directed the trial court to conclude the trial within one year to prevent further delay, with strict enforcement measures for witnesses and police non-compliance.

What did the court decide?

The trial court is directed to conclude the trial within one year. The trial court must ensure witness presence via summons and coercive measures, with the Superintendent of Police to account for exec

Laxmikant Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:170360

¶2

Court No. - 66

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15610 of 2021

¶4

Applicant :- Laxmikant Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Narendra Singh,Mamta,Pravesh Kumar Singh,Suresh Kumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶6

This is the second bail application.

¶7

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 105 of 2020 at Police Station Maharajganj, District Jaunpur under Sections 304, 323, 504 I.P.C. The applicant is in jail since 10.09.2020.

¶8

The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on 18.01.2021.

¶9

The applicant has been identified as one of the principal offenders who inflicted lathi blows to the deceased. Prosecution case set out in the FIR as well as the medical evidence corroborate the prosecution case. The offence is grave. There is likelihood that the applicant had committed the offence. At this stage, no fresh ground for bail is made out.

¶10

Without going into the merits of the case, the bail application is dismissed .

¶11

Considering the gravity of the offence, interest of justice will be served by directing the learned trial court to expedite the trial within a stipulated period of time.

¶12

The trial court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of one year from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The learned trial court shall proceed with the hearing on a day to day basis to ensure that the above stipulated timeline of one year is strictly adhered to. All witnesses and counsels are directed to cooperate with the trial proceedings.

¶13

The trial court has also to be conscious of the rights of the accused persons and is under obligation of law to ensure that all expeditious, necessary and coercive measures as per law are adopted to ensure the presence of witnesses. Counsels or parties who delay or impede the proceedings should not only be discouraged from doing so but in appropriate cases exemplary costs should also be imposed on such parties/ counsel.

¶14

The learned trial court shall issue summons by regular process as per Section 62 Cr.P.C. and also by registered post as contemplated under Section 69 Cr.P.C. to expedite the trial.

¶15

The learned trial court shall promptly take out all strict coercive measures against all the witnesses in accordance with law who fail to appear in the trial proceeding. Counsels or parties who delay or impede the proceedings should not only be discouraged from doing so but in appropriate cases exemplary costs should also be imposed on such parties/ counsel.

¶16

The police authorities shall ensure that warrants or any coercive measures as per law taken out by the learned trial court to ensure that the attendance of the witnesses are promptly executed.

¶17

The Superintendent of Police, Jaunpur shall file an affidavit before the trial court on the date fixed regarding status of execution of the warrants/service of summons taken out by the learned trial court.

¶18

In case there is a failure on part of the police authorities to execute the warrants or other coercive measures, the Superintendent of Police, Jaunpur shall state the reasons for the same in the said affidavit and also show the steps taken to execute the warrants. The Superintendent of Police, Jaunpur shall simultaneously inform the Additional Director General of Police (ADG) Varanasi Zone, about the aforesaid failure of the police authorities in the first instance to execute the warrants and coercive

¶19

measures issued by the learned trial court. If required, the Additional Director General of Police (ADG) Varanasi Zone, may issue appropriate directions to ensure that the warrants issued are promptly executed by the learned trial court.

¶20

The delay in execution of warrants and consequent absence of witnesses is one of the principal causes of delays in criminal trials and has to be addressed effectively by all stakeholders.

¶21

The trial judge shall submit a fortnightly report on the progress of trial and the steps taken to comply with this order to the learned District Judge.

¶22

A copy of this order be communicated to the learned trial judge through the learned District Judge, Jaunpur by the Registrar (Compliance) by FAX.

¶23

Order Date :- 23.8.2023 Jaswant

¶24

Digitally signed by :- JASWANT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Laxmikant v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laxmikant v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raja Alias Shadab Kahn Vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Saddam Vs State of U.P.

Ankit Yadav @ Ravi Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sunil Vs State of U.P.

Dheerendra @ Shiva Yadav Vs State of U.P.