Chhatar Pal v. The State Govt Of NCT Of Delhi

$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 1009/2016 CHHATAR PAL ..... Applicant Through:

Mr. Kapil Kaushik, Advocate versus THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through:

Mr.

Ashish Dutta, APP with SI Dharmender Pratap Singh, PS- Samaipur Badli, Delhi.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL

O R D E R

% 30.05.2016 The present is an application under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) seeking grant of regular bail in FIR No.0304/2014 under sections 201/302 IPC, registered at Police Station Samaipur Badli, Delhi.

Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant states that he would not press the present bail application, in the event this Court were to expedite the conclusion of the subject trial. In the present case it is noticed that the material witnesses on behalf of the prosecution have since been examined and only the formal witnesses are left to be examined. The case is now listed before the trial court on 26.07.2016 for examination of the remaining witnesses on behalf of the prosecution. Thus, there is no gainsaying the circumstance that the subject trial is at the fag-end.

Mr. Dutta, Learned APP appearing on behalf of the official respondent states that the remaining prosecution witnesses will be

produced before the trial court on the next date of hearing and thereafter, as and when directed by the trial court.

It is trite to state that, it is the constitutional right of every accused to be tried expeditiously particularly when he is denied his personal liberty as a consequence of the allegations levelled against him. In my view, this is one of the cardinal tenets of criminal jurisprudence. In view of the foregoing, without commenting on the merits of the present application, the same is disposed of with a direction to the concerned trial court to conclude the subject trial as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of one year from the next date of hearing before the trial court i.e., 26.07.2016, without granting any unwarranted adjournments to counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. Needless to state that liberty is reserved to the applicant to approach this court afresh in the event the subject trial is not concluded expeditiously. The application is disposed of accordingly.

Dasti.

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J MAY 30, 2016 sk