Dheeraj Kumar vs State Of U.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 3835 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 83
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34159 of 2019
 

 
Applicant :- Dheeraj Kumar
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd Imran Khan,Asheesh Kumar Tiwari
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

1. List has been revised.

2. Heard Sri Mohd. Monis holding brief of Sri Asheesh Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Vibhav Anand Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

3. This is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant. The first bail application was rejected by this Court vide order dated 1.8.2018.

4. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.0570 of 2016, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Charthawal, District Muzaffar Nagar with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. In all eight prosecution witnesses have been examined and there is no likelihood of conclusion of trial in near future. The applicant is languishing in jail since 2.10.2016 which makes it more than six years and three months. Except the period of incarceration of applicant, learned counsel could not take up any new ground for bail. Learned counsel has further stated that the applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit.

6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the trial is almost at its conclusive end as eight prosecution witnesses have been examined and the trial may be expedited.

7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, taking into consideration that there is no new ground for bail except the long period of incarceration of applicant as also the fact that trial is going on, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant.

8. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected.

9. However, looking to the period of detention of the applicant, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order or as early as possible in view of the principle as has been laid down in the recent judgments of the Apex Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab; 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India; (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment.

10. 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.

Order Date :- 7.2.2023

Vikas