Sultan Singh v. State

$~21 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 221/2016 SULTAN SINGH ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr Aditya Vikram, Advocate.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Mr Ravi Nayak, APP with Insp.

C.L.Meena, PS- Punjabi Bagh.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL

O R D E R

% 29.01.2016 The present is an application seeking regular bail in FIR No.173/2011 under Sections 302/120B IPC and 25/27/54/59 of the Arms Act registered at Police Station- Punjabi Bagh.

The applicant has been in judicial custody since 2011. Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant states that he would not press this application in the event this court were to direct expedition of the subject trial.

In the present case it is observed that most of the public witnesses have already deposed and only the official witnesses need to be examined by the trial court.

It is further noticed that the case is now listed for recording evidence on behalf of the prosecution on 30.01.2016.

It is trite to say that it is the constitutional right of every accused to be tried expeditiously, particularly when his personal liberty is constrained as a consequence of the delay in conclusion of the trial. In view of the foregoing without making any comment on the merits of

the present application, the same is disposed of with a direction to the trial court to conclude the subject trial expeditiously and preferably within a period of four months from the next date of hearing without any unwarranted adjournment to counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

Liberty is, however, reserved to the applicant to apply for regular bail afresh in the event the subject trial is not concluded expeditiously as directed. The application is disposed of accordingly.

A copy of this order be sent to the concerned trial court. SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J JANUARY 29, 2016 mk