Ghan Shyam v. State of U.P

Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47494 of 2022 Applicant :- Ghan Shyam Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Deshraj Garg,Gyan Prakash,Swati Agrawal Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rama Yadav,Tripurari Pal Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J. By means of the bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 06 of 2022 at Police Station-Kokhraj, District-Kaushambi under Sections 364, 302, 394, 201, 34, 411 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 19.01.2022. The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 21.07.2022. The following arguments made by Ms. Swati Agrawal Srivastava, learned counsel assisted by Ms. Mahzabi learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Chandan Agarwal, learned AGA and Sri Tripurari Pal, learned counsel for the informant from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:

¶1The applicant is a law abiding citizen who cooperated in the investigation and has joined the trial proceedings. The applicant never tampered with the evidence nor did he influence any witness.

¶2The trial is moving at a snail's pace and and shows no sign of early conclusion. The applicant cannot be faulted for the delay in the trial.

¶3All material prosecutions witnesses have been examined. There is no possibility of any witnesses being influenced by the applicant.

¶4Inordinate delay in concluding trial has lead to virtually an indefinite imprisonment of the applicant, without any evidence to implicate him in the offence.

¶5The right of the applicant to speedy trial has been violated.

¶6Continued incarceration of the applicant will disable him from framing an effective defence strategy, gathering evidence in his support thereof and tendering the same before the learned trial court to establish his innocence. himself.

¶7The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.

¶8The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to cooperate with the court proceedings. There is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending. This Court in Prabhat Gangwar v. State of U.P. (Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.2586 of 2023) while considering the grant of enlarging an accused on bail for preparing his defence and gathering evidence to tender the same before the learned trial court for establishing his innocence held: "Nature and gravity of the offence is certainly liable to be considered by the court while considering grant of bail. The Court has also to factor the likelihood of whether the accused committed the offence while deciding a bail application. The court also has to determine in the facts of the case whether the accused needs to be set at liberty to frame his defence and gather evidence to refute the prosecution case and establish his innocence. The bail court has to examine whether continued incarceration would disable the accused from tendering an effective defence of his case. This is a demand of processual fairness in criminal jurisprudence. Setting an accused at liberty at large on this ground cannot be applied mechanically in all cases. The issue has to be considered in the facts and circumstances of each case while doing so. All relevant facts including the evidences in the record, the conduct of the accused during the investigation as well as trial have to be adverted to before a decision is made in this regard." Considering the aforesaid parameters in light of the above facts of this case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled for bail. In wake of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant-Ghan Shyam be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial.

(ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. It is clarified that in case the trial court finds that applicant does not cooperate in the trial or adopt dilatory tactics which will compel the trial beyond the period of two months, the learned trial court shall record a finding to this effect and proceed to cancel the bail without recourse to this Court. All endeavours shall be made to conclude the trial and defence evidence within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. A copy of this order be communicated to the learned trial judge through the learned District Judge, Kaushambi by the Registrar (Compliance) by FAX. Order Date :- 17.10.2023/Pravin High Court of Judicature at Allahabad