Posted On by &filed under Allahabad High Court, High Court.


Allahabad High Court
Pushpendra vs State Of U.P. on 29 January, 2010
                                                      Reserved
Criminal Misc. IInd Bail Application No. 26324 of 2009
             Pushpendra Vs. State of U.P.

Hon. Ravindra Singh, J.

Heard Sri P.N. Mishra, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri
Apul Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, learned
A.G.A. for the State of U.P., Sri I.M. Khan, learned counsel
for the complainant and perused the record.

This is second bail application moved by the applicant
Pushpendra with a prayer that he may be released on bail
in case crime no. 562 of 2007 under section 302 IPC, P.S.
Deoband, District Saharanpur. The Criminal Misc. First Bail
Application No. 3984 of 2008 has been rejected by this court
on 18.2.2008 after considering the merits of the case.

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that
applicant is in jail since 15.9.2007. The applicant is facing
the sessions trial No. 723 of 2007 connected with S.T. No. 2
of 2008 and 3 of 2008 in which all the witnesses have been
examined, the matter was listed for arguments, then the
first informant of this case moved the transfer application
No. 419 of 2009 before this court in which the proceedings
of the trial have been stayed by the another bench of this
court vide order dated 30.7.2009. The above mentioned
transfer application is not likely to be disposed of in the near
future. The applicant remained in jail for the last two years.
In such circumstances, it is not proper to keep the applicant
in jail without any conviction. The first informant has
adopted all efforts so that the applicant may be kept in jail
for a longer period without conviction.

In reply of the above contention, it is submitted by
learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant that
the grounds taken on the merits of the case in the second
bail application have already been considered at the time of
disposal of first bail application. So far as the the pendency
of the transfer application No. 419 of 2009 in which the
interim dated 30.7.2009 have been passed staying the
proceedings of the trial is concerned, the applicant may
move stay vacation application along with counter affidavit
so that the transfer application may be disposed of
expeditiously.

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel
for the applicant, learned A.G.A, learned counsel for the
complainant and from the perusal of the record it appears
the grounds taken in the second bail application touching the
merits of the case have already been considered at the time
of disposal of first bail application. So far as the detention of
the applicant is concerned, he is in jail since 15.9.2007 as
alleged by the counsel for the applicant, the proceedings of
the trial have been stayed vide order dated 30.7.2009 which
have been passed on the Criminal Misc. Transfer Application
No. 419 of 2009 moved the first informant Smt. Brijesh, in
which the proceedings of the trial have been stayed, on this
ground alone the applicant may not be released on bail
because it is open to the applicant to move the stay vacation
application along with counter affidavit so that the transfer
application may be disposed of expeditiously. There is no
good ground for releasing the applicant on bail, The prayer
for bail is refused.

Accordingly this application is rejected.
Dt: 29.01.2010
RPD/


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

93 queries in 0.168 seconds.