Mannu Wadhwa v. State(NCT Of Delhi)
$~1 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 1004/2025 & CRL.M.A. 7609/2025 MANNU WADHWA .....Applicant Through:
Mr.
Nitin Joshi, Mr. Yuvraj Jaiswal & Mr.
Ritesh Chaudhary, Advs.
versus STATE(NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Ritesh Kumar Bahri, APP for the State Inspector Pankaj Tomar, PS- Timarpur
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN
O R D E R
% 23.04.2025 1.
The present application is filed solely on the ground that the trial has not concluded despite the fact that the applicant was arrested long back on 31.10.2018.
2.
The nominal roll indicates that even though the applicant was arrested on 31.10.2018, he has spent around four years and six months in custody since he was on interim bail between the period, 21.05.2021 to 07.04.2023.
3.
It appears that the trial has been prolonged due to onset of COVID. However, it cannot be denied that considerable period of time has already been spent by the applicant in custody. 4.
The applicant has been charged for the offence of murder for which, if convicted, the applicant would have to spend the remainder of his life in jail.
5.
The Hon'ble Apex Court has repeatedly passed orders directing release of the accused on bail when trials are prolonged without any fault of the accused persons and has directed the The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/04/2025 at 13:50:54
learned Trial Courts to expedite recording of evidence and complete the trial.
6.
The bail application filed by the applicant, on an earlier occasion, was dismissed as withdrawn by order dated 29.05.2024 by this Court. It cannot, therefore, be denied that the applicant, on merits, is not entitled to be released on bail at this stage. 7.
It is pointed out that only three witnesses have been examined as yet and certain material witnesses including the eye witness remains to be examined.
8.
Considering the overall circumstances, this Court does not consider it apposite to admit the applicant on bail at this stage. 9.
However, considering that the FIR was registered way back in the year 2018, the learned Trial Court is requested to expedite the recording of evidence and conclude the trial. 10.
This Court is also conscious of the fact that trials in various other matters have also been requested to be expedited. Considering the Board position, the learned Trial Court may not be in a position to accede to such request in every case. The learned Trial Court is consequently requested to give priority to the cases in accordance with the year in which they are registered and make efforts to conclude trials expeditiously. 11.
The petitioner is at liberty to file a fresh bail application if there is an inordinate delay in the completion of trial. 12.
The bail application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations.
AMIT MAHAJAN, J APRIL 23, 2025 "SS"
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/04/2025 at 13:50:54