MOHD HANIF Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is second application filed u/s. 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail in connection with crime no. 326/06 registered u/s. 49 (A) of the M.P.Excise Act and S. 6, 7, 8 of the M.P. Wild Life Protection Act and S. 11 (D) of the Cruelty to Animals Act and S. 6 & 9 of the Govadh Pratishedh Adhiniyam by police Sendhwa, Barwani.

(2.) Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that this time the prayer of bail has been specifically made on the ground of S. 437(6) of the Cr.P.C. because Trial Court has failed to conclude the proceedings of trial within 60 days from the first date fixed for recording evidence by the prosecution. He further submitted that proceedings of the Trial Court demonstrate that evidence could not be completed during the period of 60 days and there was no fault on the part of present applicants. He submitted that proceedings of the Trial Court shows that evidence could not be recorded because the witnesses were not produced by the prosecution. He submitted that because of mistake of the prosecution, present applicants is unnecessarily languishing in jail for last many months.

(3.) I have perused the certified copies of the order sheets recorded by the Trial Court in criminal case no. 995/06. Order sheets shows that till date only one witness have been examined by the Trial Court and many other witnesses are yet to be examined. The application which was filed before the Trial Court specifically u/s. 437(6) of the Cr.P.C. was dismissed by that Court on the ground that charges against present applicants are serious one and it does not appear that the ground which was available to the present applicants u/s. 437(6) of the Cr.P.C. has been seriously considered by the Trial Court. The release of present applicants was avoided probably because earlier application was dismissed by this court.