RAMAUTAR Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

(2.) This is the second bail application moved on behalf of applicant. His first bail application was rejected by this Court vide order dtd. 27/3/2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 6979 of 2023.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that after rejection of first bail application, the trial has commenced. He has drawn attention of the Court to the order sheet of the trial court and submitted that incident is of the year 2021, charge has been framed against the applicant vide order dtd. 1/12/2022 and since then several times dates are being fixed regularly for evidence, but till date not a single prosecution witness has been examined and the trial court has also issued non bailable warrants against the prosecution witnesses several times, and lastly it was issued on 1/8/2024 but till date no one has turned up to adduce their evidence and the applicant is in jail since 16/6/20222 and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, thus, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. It is further contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is languishing in jail since 16/6/2022, having no criminal history.