RAVINDRA SINGH,J. - (1.) HEARD Sri D.K. Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record. This is third bail application moved by the applicant Narendra Singh with a prayer that he may be released on bail in case crime No. 155 of 2003 under section 302, 307/34 IPC, P.S. Chandauli, District Chandauli.
(2.) THE Crl. Misc. First Bail Application No. 22148 of 2004 has been rejected by Hon. M.K. Mittal, J. after considering the merits of the case on 19.7.2005. The Crl. Misc. Second Bail Application No. 152 of 2006 has been rejected by his Lordship on 17.1.2006 after considering the merits of the case. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected on 19.7.2005 with the direction that trial court shall proceed with the trial under section 309 Cr.P.C. on day to day basis and the trial shall be concluded within four months. But the trial was not concluded within four months as directed on 19.7.2005, thereafter the second bail application was rejected on 17.1.2006, at that time the case was not committed to the court of sessions. Therefore, it was directed the case shall be committed to the court of session within 15 day. But till today the proceeding of the trial have not been concluded. Now the statements of the witnesses have been recorded in which the witness P.W. 1 Kailash Ram has been declared hostile because he has not supported the prosecution version. The D.W.'s Balraj Duggal and Liyakat Ali have been examined before the court concerned. According to their statements the applicant was not present at the alleged place of occurrence, according to their statements the plea of alibi is fully proved. There is no likelyhood of the conclusion of the trial in near future. Therefore, the applicant may be released on bail.
(3.) IN reply of the above contention, it is submitted by learned A.G.A. that the trial of the applicant is at the conclusion stage. At this stage the statements of the prosecution witnesses and defence witnesses may not be appreciated, it may prejudice the mind of trial court Judge. The grounds taken in the third bail application touching the merits of the case have already been considered at the time of disposal of first and second bail applications, the gravity of the offence is too much, it is a day light murder, the FIR has been promptly lodged within 1.05 hours, the applicant and three other co-accused are named in the FIR. It is alleged that the accused persons committed the murder of the deceased by way of discharging the shots. According to post mortem examination report the deceased has sustained gun shot injuries, therefore, the applicant may not be released on bail.;