( 1 ) PETITIONER who is facing trial for offences punishable under S. 302, I. P. C. and under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act has sought bail. The prosecution case in brief is that during the intervening night of 1st and 2nd June, 1987 Sub-Inspector Jagdish Prasad accompanied by other constables while on duty, at about 1. 45 a. m. heard the sound of firing and they reached near House No. 313/13 and found the petitioner coming out of the house and he was apprehended and a country-made revolver was recovered which showed that one bullet had been fired from its chamber. They went upstairs and found Pushpa lying dead. She had bullet injury near her temple. Prima facie it appears that the petitioner has been rightly challaned for the aforesaid offence and thus he does not deserve bail on merits.

( 2 ) THE learned counsel for the petitioner has, however, vehemently argued that there has taken place unusual delay in the trial of the case, so petitioner should be granted bail. It is not disputed that as yet one year period has not elapsed for completing the trial in the Sessions Court. What I find is that after the charge was framed in July, 1988 the case was fixed for evidence in the m

Click Here to Read the rest of this document