Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Gulzar Ahmed Wani @ Irshad @ Ashraf @ ... vs State Of U.P. on 25 April, 2017
Author: Chief Justice
Bench: Chief Justice, D.Y. Chandrachud
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.)NO.10387 OF 2015
GULZAR AHMED WANI @ IRSHAD @ ASHRAF @
ABDUL HAMID ... PETITIONER(S)
VS.
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH ... RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
1. On 14.12.2015, while entertaining the instant petition, this Court passed the following order :
“Learned senior counsel for the petitioner states, that the petitioner has been in jail for a period of 14 years, and that out of 96 witnesses cited, only six have been examined thus far.” A perusal of the above order would reveal, that the petitioner, by 2015, had been in incarceration as an undertrial for a period of 14 years. It also reveals, that in the entire period only 6 witnesses had been examined out of 96 prosecution witnesses.
2. On 09.09.2016, just about two years after having entertained this petition, this Court passed the following Signature Not Verified motion Bench order :
Digitally signed bySARITA PUROHIT Date: 2017.05.02 17:47:48 IST Reason:
“On the last date of hearing, i.e., on 9.8.2016, we were informed, that only 6 of the 1 prosecution witnesses have been examined.
It is now brought to our notice, that 20 of the prosecution witnesses have already been examined.
In view of the above, the respondent is directed to examine the material prosecution witnesses at the earliest.
The trial court is requested to ensure, that the material prosecution witnesses are examined, under all circumstances, within six months from today.
Post for hearing after six months.” The order extracted hereinabove, passed in September, 2016, reveals, that this Court had requested the trial court to examine all material prosecution witnesses expeditiously. In fact, a time-line of six months was given by this Court to the trial court.
3. Another factual position, which is relevant to the present controversy, is depicted in the synopsis filed by the petitioner, i.e., that at the time of filing of this petition, out of 11 criminal cases filed against the petitioner, he had been acquitted in 9 cases. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, that the petitioner has been acquitted in the 10 th case as well, and that, presently only one case is pending against the petitioner wherein through the instant petition, the petitioner is claiming concession of bail. It is also the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner, that the petitioner's co-accused had been released on bail in the year 2001. The above stated facts have not been 2 controverted by the learned counsel representing respondent-State.
4. In view of the above, we consider it just and appropriate to dispose of the instant petition, by giving one last opportunity to the prosecution to complete its examination of witnesses, at least the material witnesses, by 31.10.2017. Whether or not the examination of witnesses is completed by the said time, the petitioner shall be released on bail with effect from 1.11.2017, on such terms and conditions, as may be considered appropriate by the trial court.
...................CJI.
[JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR] .....................J. [Dr. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD] New Delhi;
25th April, 2017.
3
ITEM NO.5 COURT NO.1 SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).10387/2015 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 26/08/2015 in BN No.6446/2014 passed by the High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench) GULZAR AHMED WANI @ IRSHAD @ ASHRAF @ ABDUL HAMID Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondent(s) (With interim relief and office report) Date : 25/04/2017 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD For Petitioner(s) Mr. Mohd. Irshad Hanif,Adv.
Mr. Mujahid Ahmad,Adv.
Mr. Aarif Ali Khan,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. P.N. Mishra,Sr.Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Choudhary,Adv.
Mr. Rishi Jain,Adv.
For Mr. Samir Ali Khan,Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The special leave petition is disposed of in terms of the signed order, giving one last opportunity to the prosecution to complete its examination of witnesses, at least the material witnesses, by 31.10.2017 and directed, that whether or not the examination of witnesses is completed by the said time, the petitioner shall be released on bail with effect from 1.11.2017, on such terms and conditions, as may be considered appropriate by the trial court.
(Sarita Purohit) (Renuka Sadana) Court Master Assistant Registrar (Signed order is placed on the file) 4