Allahabad High Court
Madan Lal Harijaan vs State Of U.P. on 18 July, 2023
Author: Ajay Bhanot
Bench: Ajay Bhanot
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:141892 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27375 of 2023 Applicant :- Madan Lal Harijan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Satish Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
This is the second bail application.
By means of the the bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.411 of 2022 at Police Station-Naini, District-Prayagraj under Sections 489B, 489C I.P.C. The applicant is in jail since 11.08.2022.
The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on 20.01.2023.
The following arguments made by Shri Satish Sharma, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned AGA-I from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of interim bail:
1. The applicant is a law abiding citizen who cooperated with the police investigations and had joined the trial.
2. The status report sent by the learned trial court records that there was a delay in framing of charge as the counsels at Judgeship of Allahabad were on strike calls on various dates. Till date not a single witness has been examined. The prosecution proposes to examine 09 witnesses to bring home the charges.
3. The trial is moving at a snail's pace and is not likely to conclude anytime in the near future. The applicant is not responsible for the delay in the trial.
4. Inordinate delay in concluding trial had has led to virtually an indefinite imprisonment of the applicant without there being any credible evidence to implicate him in the offence and violates the rights of the applicant to speedy trial.
5. The 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.
In this wake, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on interim bail.
Let the applicant- Madan Lal Harijan be released on interim 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.
Before parting, this Court would like to address an issue which arisen squarely in this case. Status report sent by the learned trial court records that no witness has been examined till date. There was a delay in framing of charge as the counsels at Judgeship of Allahabad were on strike calls on 22.03.2023, 04.04.2023, 10.04.2023. The applicant is jail since 11.08.2022. The report also records that despite issuance of summons no report was sent by the police authorities and hence summons had to be issued afresh. Despite issuance of summons, the police report was not forthcoming. However, the said processes have not been executed by the police authorities. This Court is finding that in a number of cases the failure of the police authorities to serve the summons issued by the Court or implement the coercive measures taken out by the Court is a major cause for delay in trials.
Similar issues have already been raised before this Court in various bail applications. Connect with Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 29855 of 2021 (Devendra Vs. State of U.P.), Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.29718 of 2023 (Nasir Alam v. State of U.P.), Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.20644 of 2023 (Sunil Nishad v. State of U.P.) and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.16871 of 2023 (Bhanwar Singh @ Karamvir v. State of U.P.).
Judgment reserved on the issue of responsibility of police authorities to serve summons and execute coercive measures taken out by the Court in a timely manner.
Order Date :- 18.7.2023 Dhananjai