The right to a speedy trial is fundamental, and prolonged detention without trial infringes on personal liberty, necessitating bail.

ORDER :

FARJAND ALI, J.

1. The jurisdiction of this court has been invoked by way of filing the instant third bail application under Section 439 CrPC at the instance of accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below:

2. His first and second bail applications being SBCRLMB Nos.18708/2021 & 10914/2023 were dismissed as not pressed by this Court vide orders dated 22.11.2021 & 19.01.2024. While deciding the previous bail application a liberty was given to the petitioner to move a fresh bail application after recording the statement of Uganti, now she has been examined in the trial as P.W. 10. Hence the instant application for bail.

3. It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that the petitioner is behind the bars since the year 2021 and no case for the alleged offences is made out against him and his incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in the case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the accused-petitioner and he has been made an accused based on conjectures and surmises.

4. Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and submits that the present case is not fit for enlargement of accused on bail.

5. Have considered the submissions made by both the parties and have perused the material available on record.

6. Perusal of the record revealing that the petitioner is behind the bars in this case since June 2021 i.e. more than three have elapsed, still the trial has not been concluded and it seems that it would take further more time to reach onto its conclusion.

7. P.W. 10 Uganti W/o Dharmi stated in her on oath statement that on fateful day of the incident, the accused persons including the petitioner entered into the agricultural field and started ploughing in her field thus a protest was made by the deceased Dulli whereupon, the accused Dhara and Mahesh fired gun shots upon him as a consequence of which, he fell down on the earth. Though, there are allegations that the petitioner had inflicted a lathi blow on the legs of the victim Dulli, however, the postmortem report dated 01.06.2021 revealing that the cause of death of Dulli was multiple firearm injuries. Prima facie, it is further revealing that other accused have also inflicted stick injuries on the legs of vicitm Dulli. Several other accused have already been enlarged on bail in this case except accused Mahesh and Dhara Singh. The bail granted to Mahesh has been cancelled by this Court vide order dated 09.05.2024 passed in SBCRLCB No.92/2022. Thus, the fact cannot be ignored that the petitioner is incarcerated for more than three years and the firearm injury which is the main cause of death opined in the postmortem report is not attributed to the present petitioner.

8. This Court feels that an under trial prisoner should not be kept confined for an indefinite period for no fault of them in impeding the course of trial. A perusal of the material revealing that the trial had been commenced in this matter in the year 2021 but owing to one or the other reason, the recording of the prosecution witnesses could not be completed. This Court feels that looking to the snail’s pace progress of the trial, it would still take a long time to reach onto a legitimate conclusion. It is also noticed that sincere endeavors have not been made by the trial Court in proceeding with the trial to get an early culmination of the same.

9. Dealing with the identical issue where the trial had been protracted for unreasonable period, an elaborate discussion has been made by this Court while deciding t