Allahabad High Court
Ajeet Singh @ Golu vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 24 May, 2024
Author: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
Bench: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:94798
Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23406 of 2023
Applicant :- Ajeet Singh @ Golu
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
1. Applicant-Ajeet Singh alias Golu has approached this Court by way of filing present bail application seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 185 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 506 IPC and 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Nebua Naurangiya, District Kushinagar.
2. This bail application is pending before Court for last about one year. Sri Gaurav Kumar Singh, learned counsel for applicant is not present and present status of trial is also not on record.
3. In administration of justice Advocates have a vital role to play that not only they have to represent their respective clients but being an ?Officer of Court? they have to be fair towards Court and to provide their valuable assistance.
4. However often Court finds that learned counsel are not appearing to press bail application probably on a ground that they have no instructions or change of Bench, but, once they have filed a Vakalatnama which imposes a solemn duty to appear and assist the Court, they have legal and moral obligation to appear before Court to place their case, irrespective of fact that they are properly briefed or not. Sanctity of a Vakalatnama is also been described by Supreme Court in a very recent judgment of Bar of Indian lawyers through it?s President Jasbir Singh Malik Vs D.K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr. and connected matters 2024 INSC 410 (Decided on May 14, 2024) (Para 40).
5. In this regard an observation made by Supreme Court in Rafiq and Anr. Vs Munshi Lal and Anr. (1981) 2 SCC 788 and Secretary, Department of Horticulture, Chandigarh and Anr. Vs Raghu Raj (2008) 13 SCC 395, would also be relevant that an Advocate has to appear and argue the case as and when it is called out for hearing and failure to do so would not only discourage clients but also discourteous to the Court and it must be severely discountenanced. The Court also takes note of order passed by Supreme Court in Rajanti Devi alias Rajanti Kumari vs. The Union of India, Miscellaneous Application No. 2578 of 2023 in SLP (Criminal) Diary No. 43646 of 2023 that a bail application be disposed of preferably within two weeks.
6. Sri D.P.S. Chauhan, learned AGA appearing for State, submits that applicant, who is in jail since 27.01.2023, is facing trial for offence of kidnapping and rape of a minor girl etc. However, present status of trial is not on record.
7. In aforesaid circumstances, taking note of evidence against applicant and that present status of trial is not on record and also that applicant is in jail since 27.01.2023, therefore, even in absence of counsel for applicant, in the interest of justice, this application is disposed of with observation that in case trial is not concluded or substantially progressed till date, applicant will have liberty to approach this Court or Trial Court concerned, as advised, afresh alongwith status of trial, after a reasonable period. Meanwhile, Trial Court shall take all endeavour to conclude trial.
8. A copy of this order be communicated to applicant through Jail Superintendent concerned.
9. Registrar (Compliance) to take steps.
Order Date :- 24.5.2024
AK
