Back
2022 Supreme(J&K) 427
JAMMU AND KASHMIR HIGH COURT
Rajnesh Oswal, J.
Abdul Rashid Malik – Appellant
Versus
Union Territory of J&k – Respondent
Bail Application No. 182 of 2020
Decided On : 27-12-2022
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Bail Proceedings
Headnote
Interim Bail - Age of Petitioner - The court made the interim bail granted to the 75-year-old petitioner absolute, considering the absence of allegations of violation of bail conditions and the petitioner's age.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was granted interim bail, and the respondent sought to cancel it based on serious allegations and the recorded statement of the prosecutrix. The petitioner's counsel argued against cancellation, emphasizing the absence of allegations of violating bail conditions and the petitioner's age.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the interim bail should be made absolute due to the petitioner's age and the absence of allegations of violating bail conditions. The trial court was directed to conclude the trial expeditiously.
Issues: Allegations against the petitioner, cancellation of interim bail, and expeditious trial conclusion.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the absence of allegations of bail condition violations and the petitioner's age as grounds to make the interim bail absolute.
Final Decision: The interim bail granted to the petitioner was made absolute, and the trial court was directed to conclude the trial expeditiously.
Aarushi Shukla, Advocate, Pawan Dev Singh, Advocate, O. P. Thakur, Advocate, RKS Thakur, Advocate
JUDGMENT
Rajnesh Oswal, J. - Vide order dated 11.11.2021, the petitioner was granted interim bail.
2. Mr. O. P. Thakur, learned counsel for respondent No. 2 submits that there are serious allegations against the petitioner and even statement of the prosecutrix has also been recorded, as such, he submits that interim bail granted to the petitioner be cancelled.
3. Ms. Aarushi Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are no allegations against the petitioner for violating any condition imposed by this Court while granting bail and it shall be travesty of justice if the petitioner who is 75 years of age is sent to the jail, when the statement of the prosecutrix has been recorded.
4. Without commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the interim bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 11.11.2021 is required to be made absolute particularly in view of the fact that the petitioner is 75 years of age at present and there are no allegations that he has violated any condition imposed by this Court while grating bail.
5. Viewed thus, interim bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 11.11.2021 is made absolute on the same terms and conditions.
6. The respondents shall be at liberty to lay a motion before the learned trial court in the event, there is any violation of the condition by the petitioner imposed by this Court while granting bail. Taking into consideration the long pendency of the trial, learned trial court is directed to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three months.
7. Disposed of.
