Allahabad High Court
Raj Kumar @ Chhedi vs State Of U.P. on 24 July, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:147272 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3799 of 2021 Applicant :- Raj Kumar @ Chhedi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Singh,Noor Mohammad,Virendra Singh Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant and counter-affidavit filed today on behalf of the State are taken on record.
2. Heard Sri Noor Mohammad, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State-respondent.
3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 156 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 34 IPC, Police Station- Ghatampur, District- Kanpur Nagar, during pendency of the trial in the court below.
4. FIR of the present case was lodged against the applicant and four others and according to the FIR, on a minor issue, applicant and his associates made assault and due to assault made by them four persons sustained injuries. It is further mentioned in the FIR that applicant caused injury on the chest of the deceased through the spear made by iron rod.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that it was a case of free fight in which both sides sustained injuries and totally on the basis of false allegation, it has been alleged that applicant caused injury on the chest of the deceased through spear made by iron rod.
6. He further submitted that although, during investigation, it is alleged that blood stained iron rod was recovered on the pointing out of the applicant and was sent for chemical analysis but till date there is no report of FSL on reord, therefore, till date, the alleged recovered iron rod could not be connected with the instant crime.
7. He further submitted that applicant is in jail since 20.04.2020 i.e. for last about three years and three months and till date, only one prosecution witness could be examined although, in the charge-sheet, there are as many as 16 witnesses, therefore, it appears that trial of the case is moving with languid pace. He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.
8. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is allegation against the applicant that he made assault on the chest of the deceased through spear made by iron rod and iron rod, used by the applicant was also recovered on his pointing out, therefore applicant does not deserve bail.
9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
10. Although, from the record, it reflects that in the incident both sides sustained injuries but from the perusal of the injury report of the applicant side, it appears that injured persons sustained minor injuries but from the side of informant one person lost his life and there is specific allegation against the applicant that he caused one penetrative wound on the chest of the deceased through spear made by iron rod.
11. Further, during investigation when applicant was arrested then he confessed his guilt and on his pointing out blood stained iron rod was recovered, which was used by him in commission of the instant crime.
12. Although, there is no FSL report on record to show that the blood, which was present on the iron rod was the human blood but as per the evidence available on record, it appears that applicant caused fatal injury to the deceased and on his pointing out, weapon used in the crime was recovered.
13. Although, applicant is in jail for last about three years and three months and only one prosecution witness could be examined till date and in the charge-sheet, there are as many as 16 prosecution witnesses but it is a case of 302 IPC, in which minimum punishment provided is life imprisonment, therefore, merely on the ground of slow progress in the trial in a case in which specific role of causing fatal injury to deceased has been assigned to applicant, applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.
14. Accordingly, the instant bail application is rejected.
15. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.
16. However, considering the fact that applicant is in jail for last about three years and three months and till date only one prosecution witness could be examined, trial court is directed to conclude the trial within a year from the date of communication of the order passed today by this Court strictly as per the provisions of Section 309 Cr.P.C., if there is no legal impediment.
17. Registrar (Compliance) is directed to communicate this order to the trial court within 48 hours for compliance.
Order Date :- 24.7.2023 KK Patel