SATISH CHANDER Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SATISH Chander alias Bitu prays for grant of bail in a case FIR No. 146 dated 20-4-2004, under Sections 406/420, IPC, registered at police station Nakodar, District Jalandhar.

(2.) THE earlier application (Crl. Misc. No. 28678-M of 2004) filed by the petitioner for regular bail was dismissed at that stage vide order dated 27.8.2004. The petitioner now seeks the concession of bail by virtue of statutory provisions contained in Section 437(6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. When the trial was not concluded within the stipulated period after framing of the charge, the petitioner moved an application before the trial Court for bail which stands declined vide order dated 11.11.2004 (Annexure P2). Another application moved by the petitioner for the same relief met the same fate vide order dated 30-11-2004 of learned Additional Sessions Judge (Annexure P3).

(3.) MS . Bedi while strengthening her arguments contends that till date no prosecution witness has been examined. She further contends that the bail application of the petitioner has been declined by the learned trial court and even by the learned Additional Sessions Judge without assigning any cogent reasons. The ground taken by the learned trial court that the evidence of the prosecution could not be recorded as the Court was on leave is not sustainable for the reason that even if on one date the learned Presiding Officer was not holding the Court, the case could be adjourned for a short date. The same is not done in this case. The learned counsel then contends that the impugned order Annexure P/2 of the learned trial court itself indicates that the Court did not grant the bail to the petitioner at that stage terming it as an early stage. Since no prosecution witness has been recorded in this case till date and the petitioner is languishing in the Jail since long, valuable right of concession of bail has accrued to him especially when the trial is not likely to be concluded at an early date.