Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 7, Cited by 2]

Allahabad High Court

Suresh Sharma And Another vs State Of U.P. on 6 January, 2010

Author: Surendra Singh

Bench: Surendra Singh

Court No. - 48

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32038
of 2008

Petitioner :- Suresh Sharma And Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Petitioner Counsel :- Rajendra P. Tiwari
Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate

Hon'ble Surendra Singh,J.

The applicants-Suresh Sharma and Bhagat Singh seek bail in Case Crime No.3940A of 2008 under Sections 302, 308, 504, 506, 323, 452 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Lalitpur.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

Learned counsel for the applicants has contended that there is a cross case and cross F.I.R. was also registered. Three persons, namely, Manu Sharma, Mahesh Sharma and Smt. Manju on the accused-applicants' side have received injuries in this incident, although the injuries sustained by the injured persons were found to be simple in nature. It is further submitted that injuries sustained on applicants' side have not properly been explained by the prosecution. It has been next argued that the applicants are in jail since 11.7.2008 and the trial has not concluded, although PW 1 and PW 2 have been examined and the trial is going on, thus the applicants are entitled to be released on bail.

Taking note of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, I do not think it proper to consider the prayer for the bail of the applicants. The prayer for bail is refused and the bail application is rejected.

However, keeping in view the fact that the applicants are in jail since 11.7.2008, the trial court is directed to make every endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible in consonance with the provisions of Section 309 Cr.P.C. Both the parties are expected to cooperate in the trial and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. The office is directed to send the copy of this order to the District and Sessions Judge/trial court for intimation and necessary compliance.

Order Date :- 6.1.2010 MN/-