Danish v. State Of NCT Of Delhi
$~99 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + DANISH .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Anurag Jain, Mr. Kasim Khan, Mr. Mohd. Aman Mirza, Mr. Shivpal Singh, Mr. Nishant Rai and Mr. Rahul Bhardwaj, Advocates.
versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Yudhvir Singh Chauhan, APP for the State with Mr. Anvesh Chandila, Mr. Ujjwal Gupta, Mr. Nikhil Kunal, Mr. Vishal Kaushik, Mr. Sushant Chaudhary, Ms. Sunita Farswan and Mr. Dishant Tiwari, Advocates.
Insp. Vikas Panwar, PS Farsh Bazar
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
O R D E R
% 31.07.2024 1.
The present application under Section 439 Cr.P.C has been filed by the Petitioner for grant of regular bail in FIR No.830/2015 dated 02.10.2015, registered at Police Station Farsh Bazar for offences punishable under Sections 302/34 IPC and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act. 2.
Material on record indicates that the Petitioner herein had earlier approached this Court for grant of bail by filing the bail application being BAIL APPLN. 1808/2023. This Court disposed of the said bail application vide Order dated 09.01.2024. Paragraph Nos.7 and 8 of the said Order dated 09.01.2024 read as under:
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
"7. As recorded in the order dated 09.05.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, one of the witnesses, that is PW -8, has identified the applicant as the person who held on to the deceased while the coaccused shot him. It has further been observed in the said order that 26 witnesses have already been examined by the prosecution and the trial is likely to be concluded soon. The applicant was earlier declared as a Proclaimed Offender and was arrested only later.
8. Though the applicant has been in custody for a period of around five years, keeping in view the above facts, I do not deem it appropriate to release the applicant on bail at this stage of the trial. However, the learned Trial Court is requested to expedite the trial and make an endeavour to conclude the same within a period of six months from today."
3.
A perusal of the aforesaid Order shows that the Trial Court was requested to expedite the trial and make an endeavour to conclude the trial within a period of six months. Since the trial was not completed within a period of six months and no progress in the trial is being made, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the instant application for grant of bail.
4.
On 24.05.2024, this Court was apprised of the fact that the Orders passed by this Court is not being complied with in the right earnest. 5.
Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner points out that on 15.05.2024, four months adjournment has been given by the Trial Court and the matter has now been fixed for 03.09.2024. The trial is, therefore, being conducted ignoring the spirit of the Order dated 09.01.2024 passed by this Court.
6.
Learned APP appearing for the State informs the Court that out of The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
total 40 witnesses, 29 witnesses have been examined and the remaining 11 witnesses are left to be examined.
7.
The Trial Court is requested to proceed further with the matter keeping in mind the spirit of the Orders of this Court and should make an endeavour to ensure that long dates are not given in the matter, especially, when the High Court has made a request that trial be concluded expeditiously. The request was made by this Court because the Petitioner has undergone incarceration for more than five years. 8.
The Bench of Five Judges of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab, (1994) 3 SCC 569 has held that speedy trial is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 9.
In view of the facts of the present case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the Petitioner at this juncture, however, keeping in mind the time spent by the Petitioner in incarceration, this Court once again requests the Trial Court to expedite the examination of remaining 11 witnesses and conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four months from today.
10.
With these observations, the bail application is disposed of, along with pending application(s), if any.
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J JULY 31, 2024 S. Zakir The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.