Partly allowed

Savej v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC11 Jan 2023BAIL/55689/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application dismissed as meritless, the High Court did not enlarge the applicant on bail due to the gravity of the offence. However, the Court directed the trial court to conclude the trial within one year and imposed coercive measures to ensure witness attendance.

What did the court decide?

The bail application was dismissed, but the trial court was directed to conclude the trial within one year and adopt coercive measures against witnesses who fail to appear.

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

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 55689 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Savej Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shams Uz Zaman Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 508 of 2022 at Police Station Baghpat, District Bhaghpat under Sections 323, 452, 504, 506, 307 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 09.06.2022.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned trial court on 27.09.2022.

¶7

The applicant has been identified as the principal offender who discharged firearm and inflicted gunshot injuries. Medical report as well as the statement of the injured corroborate the prosecution story. The offence is grave. There is likelihood that the applicant committed the offence. At this stage, no case for bail is made out.

¶8

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

¶9

Shri Shams Uz Zaman, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant is in jail since 09.06.2022. The trial is moving at a snail's pace and is not likely to conclude anytime in the near future. Inordinate delay in concluding trial had lead to virtually

¶10

an indefinite imprisonment of the applicant and violates the rights of the applicant to speedy trial.

¶11

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.

¶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 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.

¶14

Police and administrative authorities of the State are also directed to ensure that the coercive measures adopted by the court are promptly executed to ensure

¶15

the presence of the witnesses on the appointed date before the trial court.

¶16

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.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 11.1.2023 Dhananjai

¶19

Digitally signed by :- DHANANJAI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Savej v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Savej 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shyam Sundar Vs State of U.P.

Anwar Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Vs State of U.P.

Jhandu @ Rishipal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohm Salmaan Vs State of U.P.

Saddam Ali Vs State of U.P.