Allahabad High Court High Court

Shrawan Yadav vs State Of U.P.Through Station … on 5 January, 2010

Allahabad High Court
Shrawan Yadav vs State Of U.P.Through Station … on 5 January, 2010
Court No. - 48

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4712 of 2009

Petitioner :- Shrawan Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P.Through Station House Officer
Petitioner Counsel :- Manish C. Tiwari,Anil Kumar Chaudhary
Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate,Ram Singh Yadav

Hon'ble Surendra Singh,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and
perused the material placed on record.

It is contended on behalf of the applicant that the incident did not take
place in the manner, date and time as suggested by the prosecution.
Learned counsel has contended that the prosecution version is
inconsistent with the medical report and the applicant is in jail since
25.5.2008 and the trial has not commenced and is likely to consume
some time to conclude.

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has contended that the applicant is
named in the First Information Report. The incident is alleged to have
taken place at about 4 p.m. in the month of May 2008 and the FIR was
lodged without any delay on the same day at about 5 p.m. and the
specific role of causing brutal murder of the deceased with the aid of
Baghari has been assigned to the applicant, therefore, the present
application for bail deserves to be rejected.
Taking note of the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties as
well as having perused the material placed on record, without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I do not find any good
and fresh ground to consider the bail prayer. The prayer for bail is
refused and the application is, therefore, rejected.
However, taking into account that the applicant is in jail since 3.4.2008,
the trial court is directed to make every endeavour to conclude the trial
expeditiously in consonance with the provisions of Section 309 Cr.P.C.
Both the parties are expected to cooperate with the proceedings and not
to seek unnecessary adjournments.

The office is directed to send the copy of the order to the District
Judge/Trial Court immediately for the communication and necessary
compliance.

Order Date :- 5.1.2010
Mt/