KAMAL UDDIN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. N. Saxena, J. This is the second bail application moved by Kamal Uddin in Case Crime No. 260 of 1990 under Section 302, IPC, Police Station Nagphani, district Moradabad. The earlier bail application was rejected by me on 6th May, 1992.

(2.) THE question whether the applicant is a minor or not was considered in the earlier order. It has been claimed on behalf of the applicant that the earlier order was passed on a copy of Ration Card and the applicant has now brought an endorsement by the concerned authorities that copy of Ration Card cannot be given. I have perused the endorsement. THE endorsement, in fact, is that no copy of the enquiry report regarding the Ration Card can be issued. This endorsement, therefore, does not help the applicant at all. Since the question of age has already been considered once, it cannot be consi dered again.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the complainant Sri M. D. Misra has referred to a Division Bench decision of this Court in Pappoo alias Ashok Kumar v. State of U. P. , 1991 ACrr 476, where it was decided that it will not be correct ennunciation of law to hold that an accused is entitled to be released on bail only on the ground of delay in the trial.