Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RANJIT KUMAR versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Ranjit Kumar v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 3916 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 14058 (22 August 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon'ble M. K. Mittal, J.

The fourth bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant Ranjeet Kumar S/o Sita Ram for release on bail in case crime no. 153 of 2003 under Section 25 Arms Act and Case Crime No.  138 of 2003 under Section 302 IPC, P.S. Nazirabad, District Kanpur Nagar.

Heard Sri V. P. Srivastava, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri P.N. Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by order dated 11.12.2003 and the trial Court was directed to comply with the provisions of Section 309 Cr.P.C. Second bail application was rejected by order dated 26.4.2005 and the learned Trial Court was directed to conclude the trial within three weeks. Third bail application was rejected by order dated 11.11.2005 and the learned trial court was directed to conclude the trial within two weeks.

Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the trial has not yet been concluded and so far only six prosecution witnesses have been examined. Learned counsel for the applicant produced the certified copy of the order sheet of Sessions Trial No. 1427 of 2003 and it shows that the learned Trial Court is making efforts for early conclusion of the trial. However order sheet also shows that adjournments are being taken by the prosecution and some adjournments have also been taken on behalf of the accused persons and on account of absence warrants have been issued against them.

The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that sufficient time has elapsed and accused is languishing in jail and trial has not been concluded and therefore he be released on bail.

According to the learned A.G.A. there is no new ground for release of the accused on bail after the rejection of the third bail application and that the applicant has been assigned the role of firing shot resulting in the death of Sunil Mishra.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that there is no new ground, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. The learned Trial Court is making efforts for expeditious hearing of the case and the learned Trial Court is further directed to take coercive steps, if necessary, to ensure the presence of the witnesses. Learned Trial Court shall also see that no unnecessary adjournment is allowed to the prosecution or the accused and both parties are expected to cooperate in speedy trial.

With this observation, fourth bail application is liable to be rejected and is hereby rejected. Copy of the order be certified to the lower Court within seven days.

Dated: 22.8.2006

RKS/3916/06


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.