The Allahabad High Court while granting bail to a man accused of murder, said that it is deeply regrettable that the applicant has been languishing in jail for approximately seven years and nine months. Such prolonged incarceration, coupled with the complete lack of progress in the trial, is a serious infringement on the applicant’s fundamental right to a speedy trial as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
A Single Bench of Justice Krishan Pahal passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Bail Application filed by Sarvajeet Singh.
The Applicant seeks bail in Session Trial (State vs Sarvajeet Singh), pending in the court of Sessions Judge/EC Act, Gorakhpur, arising out of Case under Sections 302, 307 IPC, Police Station- Jhangaha, District- Gorakhpur, during the pendency of trial.
This is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant. The first bail application was rejected by the Coordinate Bench of the Court by the order dated 3.12.2020.
Counsel for the applicant has stated that the trial is not moving ahead and is at a standstill. There is no likelihood of conclusion of trial in near future. The applicant is incarcerated since 23.5.2017, i.e for a period of more than seven years and nine months. The fundamental right of the applicant enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India stands violated as he has been incarcerated for a substantial period of time for no fault of his. The applicant is ready to cooperate with the trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra, the bail application has been opposed on the ground that applicant is the main accused person as it was he who had fired at the deceased person causing his death.
The AGA could not bring forth any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant.
It is a settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by the AGA, the Court noted.
“Keeping the applicant in custody under these circumstances, when there is no realistic possibility of the trial being concluded in the near future, is both unjust and unwarranted. Justice demands that the applicant’s continued detention be reconsidered, and appropriate relief be granted without delay.
Having heard counsels for the parties, taking into consideration the circumstances of the case as three accused persons are still absconding, there being no likelihood of conclusion of trial in near future and the fact that there are sixteen witnesses to be examined of which three have been examined; furthermore in the case of summoning additional accused U/s 319 CrPC, the statements of already examined witnesses are to be recorded again and the trial shall almost proceed de-novo as also in the light of the judgments of the Supreme Court, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail,” the Court observed while allowing the bail application.
The Court ordered that,
Let the applicant- Sarvajeet Singh involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 CrPC/ 351 BNSS. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.