MOHD. JAN Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AND on his search two kgs. of mor­phine was alleged to have been recovered.

(2.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the applicant has moved this third bail ap­plication on the ground that as many as eighteen dates have been fixed by the trial Court but the prosecution has not been able to produce its witnesses. A report was called for from the Special Judge (Economic Offences), Barabanki in whose Court the trial against the applicant is going on. A perusal of the report would reveal that the case against the applicant remained pending in two or three Courts before it was finally transferred to the Court of Special Judge and till the date of the report, no witness had been examined by the prosecution. Obviously the prosecution has failed to bring its evidence before the trial Court despite it was af­forded dozens of opportunities to examine witnesses. No plausible reason has been offered as to why the witnesses have not turned up for their examination. Keeping all these aspects of the matter in view, I hold that the applicant who has been in jail for over a period of three years deserve to be released on bail. Accordingly the ap­plicant is admitted to bail on his executing a personal bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfac­tion of the trial Court. Bail granted.