Allahabad High Court
Firoz Alam vs State Of U.P. on 29 January, 2010
Author: Surendra Singh
Bench: Surendra Singh
Court No. - 48 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2879 of 2008 Petitioner :- Firoz Alam Respondent :- State Of U.P. Petitioner Counsel :- Gaurav Kakkar Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate,V.M. Zaidi Hon'ble Surendra Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.M. Zaidi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties no.2 and 3 as well as learned A.G.A. and also perused the material placed on record.
The applicant by way of filing the present application in terms of Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. has sought to cancel the bail granted to the opposite Parties no.2 & 3 by the Sessions Judge, Bijnor in Bail Application Nos.1808 of 2007,1809 of 2007 and 1972 of 2007 in Case Crime No.585 of 2007, under Sections 452,323,307,302 IPC P.S. Kiratpur, District Bijnor.
Submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant, the informant of the aforesaid case that after the accused was released on bail in pursuance of the order dated 22.11.2007 passed by the sessions Judge, Bijnor the informant and independent witnesses are being subjected to threats by the opposite parties no.2 and 3 and their supporters and there is hardly any progress in the case which is being tried.
Indisputably, the parameter, for grant of bail and cancellation of bail are different. Very cogent and overwhelming circumstances are necessary for an order directing the cancellation of the bail already granted. However, bail once granted, should not be cancelled in a mechanical manner without considering whether any supervening circumstances have rendered no longer conducive to a fair trial to allow the accused- opposite Parties No.2 & 3 to retain their freedom by enjoying the concession of bail during the trial. Viewed in this perceptive in the absence of any supervening circumstances, it will not be possible for this Court to cancel the bail of the opposite Parties No.2 & 3 at this stage. Moreover since accused- opposite Parties No.2 & 3 are on bail for considerable length of time, I do not think it appropriate to cancel the bail. The prayer for cancelling the bail is declined and the application is accordingly rejected. However, the trial court is directed to make an endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible without unreasonable delay.
It is further provided that if the informant or any witness seeks protection for appearance before the court during the trial, the same shall be provided by the concerned police official.
Order Date :- 29.1.2010 Mt/