HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36191 of 2024 Court No. - 91 HON'BLE RAJ BEER SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 2. The present second bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 320 of 2019, under Sections - 302, 120-B, 34 I.P.C., Police Station - Kotwali Kayamganj, District - Farrukhabad, with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It was submitted that as per version of first information report, role of firing was assigned to the applicant but during investigation it was found that applicant has got murdered deceased from co-accused persons and thus, prosecution version is quite contradictory. Statement of witness Fateh Ali Khan was referred and it was pointed out that he did not name the applicant and as per statements of accused persons, the role of firing was assigned to co-accused persons. 4. It is further submitted that first bail application of applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 31.05.2023 but only a few witnesses have Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arun Kumar Tripathi, Divyansh Rai Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Atul Sharma, G.A., Rahul Jain Sami Ali Khan .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) been examined so far, whereas applicant is languishing in jail since 27.05.2021 and thus, applicant has already undergone custody of about four and a half years. Criminal history shown against applicant has been explained. Lastly, it was submitted that in case, applicant is granted bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. 5. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that the applicant has committed murder of an eye surgeon in broad day light in mid of city. Applicant is named in the first information report and the role of firing was assigned to him. After incident, applicant has absconded and process under Section - 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. was issued against him and a case under Section - 174-A I.P.C. was also registered against him. Later applicant was arrested from Chennai. Applicant was previously convicted in a case under Section - 6 Passport Act and he was also convicted in a passport related case in Malaysia. It was submitted that trial is being delayed by the accused persons. It was further submitted that in case applicant is granted bail, he may flee from justice and tamper with evidence. 6. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record. 7. Perusal of record shows that applicant is named in the first information report and role of firing at deceased has been assigned to him. Incident relates to a day light murder of an eye surgeon. Except period of custody, no new ground is made out in this second bail application. Considering entire fact and antecedents of the applicant, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 8. However, considering the period of custody of applicant, the trial Court is BAIL No. 36191 of 2024 2 directed to expedite the trial and to record the statements of all the material witnesses as early as possible preferably within a period of nine months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the party. The applicant would be at liberty to file a fresh bail application after expiry of nine months. 9. With aforesaid observations, the second bail application filed on behalf of applicant - Sami Ali Khan, is hereby rejected. 10. A copy of this order be transmitted to the trial Court concerned for necessary compliance. March 10, 2026 S Rawat BAIL No. 36191 of 2024 3 (Raj Beer Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHOBHIT RAWAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad