Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Arun Kumar Tyagi, J.
Ravi Kumar - Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana - Respondent
CRM-M-47549-2019
Decided On : 27-02-2020
Bail - Criminal Procedure - Observations on Trial Proceedings
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a petition for grant of regular bail in a criminal case but later withdrew the petition. The petitioner had been in custody since 18.06.2018.
Finding of the Court:
The Court directed the Trial Court to expedite the trial and conclude recording of prosecution evidence within four months by conducting trial on a day-to-day basis. It also instructed the Trial Court to take appropriate action against police officials for non-appearance of witnesses.
Issues: Expedition of trial proceedings, non-appearance of witnesses, and action against police officials
Ratio Decidendi: The Court relied on precedents to emphasize the need for expediting trial proceedings and ensuring the presence of witnesses, as well as taking action against police officials for non-appearance of witnesses.
Final Decision: The Trial Court was directed to expedite the trial and conclude recording of prosecution evidence within four months, and to take appropriate action against police officials for non-appearance of witnesses.
JUDGMENT
Arun Kumar Tyagi, J. (Oral) - The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.126 dated 01.06.2018 registered under Sections 120-B, 148, 149, 201, 285, 302, 364, 365 and 452 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Bhattu Kalan, Fatehabad.
2. Reply by way of affidavit of Sh. Subhash Chander, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, City, Fatehabad has been filed in the Court today which is taken on record.
3. After arguing for some time, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner does not want to continue with the present petition and the same may be dismissed as withdrawn at this stage.
4. Dismissed as withdrawn at this stage.
5. Before parting with this case, it may be observed that the petitioner is in custody since 18.06.2018. As per the information given by learned State Counsel only one prosecution witness out of 44 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far. In view of the observations made by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Doongar Singh vs. State of Rajasthan 2018 (1) RCR Criminal 256 , State of U.P. vs. Shambhu Nath Singh and others, 2001 (2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 390 , Hussain and another vs. Union of India 2017(2) RCR Criminal 312 and Thana Singh vs. Central Bureau of Narcotics 2013 (1) R.C.R(Criminal) 861 , the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude recording of prosecution evidence preferably within a period of four months by conducting trial on day to day basis by allocating block of dates for the trial as directed by Hon'ble Supreme Court and by issuing coercive process for securing presence of the witnesses, if so required.
6. In case of non-appearance of official witnesses, the Trial Court shall take appropriate action against the concerned police officials absenting without any lawful excuse by filing complaint under Section 174 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 or taking proceedings under Section 350 of the Cr.P.C. against them.
7. A copy of this order be sent to the Trial Court concerned for requisite compliance.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
