Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:35999 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46368 of 2024 Applicant :- Varishuddin Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Srivastava,Ajay Nand Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Satyam Narayan,Zulfeqar Haider Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. None appeared on behalf of informant even in revised call. 2. Heard Sri Abhishek Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.N. Srivastava, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 179 of 2020, under Section 302 IPC, Police Station- Meerapur, District- Muzaffar Nagar, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 4. FIR of the present case was lodged against applicant on 17.06.2020 and according to FIR, applicant committed the murder of his younger brother by causing axe injury to him. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is, however, elder brother of the deceased but on the basis of false allegation, he has been made accused in the present matter. 6. He further submitted that in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 19.06.2020 i.e. for last more than four and half years and considering his long incarceration, a report was called from the court concerned about the current status of the trial, which is now on record and from its perusal, it reflects that out of 11 witnesses of the charge sheet, till date only 2 witnesses could be examined, therefore, trial of the case is moving with languid pace and there is no hope of its early disposal. 7. He further submitted that right of speedy trial is the fundamental right of an accused and on its validation, even in serious cases, he can be released on bail and considering the fact that in the present matter, applicant is in jail for last more than four and half years, it cannot be said that fundamental right of speedy trial of the applicant has not been infringed. He placed reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court passed in case of Tapas Kumar Palit vs. State of Chhattisgarh 2025 SCC Online SC 322. 8. He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history. 9. Par contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant is elder brother of the deceased and he committed his murder by causing axe injury to him and incident was witnessed by family members of the applicant including wife of the deceased but could not dispute the fact that in the present matter, applicant is in jail for last more than four and half years and till date, out of 11 witnesses of the charge sheet, only 2 could be examined. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is not having any criminal history. 10. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. However, as per allegation, applicant committed the murder of his younger brother by causing axe injury to him and there are also witnesses, who witnessed the incident but it reflects, in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 19.06.2020 i.e. for last more than four and half years and considering his long incarceration, a report was called from the court concerned, which is now on record and from its perusal, it reflects that till date, out of 11 witnesses of the charge sheet, only 2 witnesses could be examined, therefore, this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that trial of the case is moving with languid pace and there is no hope of its early disposal. Further, from the report of the court concerned, it could not be reflected that applicant caused any delay in trial. 12. Further, right of speedy trial is the fundamental right of an accused and on its violation, even in serious cases, he can be released on bail and considering the fact that in the present matter, applicant is in jail for last more than four and half years and there is no evidence, which can suggests that due to his delaying tactics trial is being lingered on, it cannot be said that fundamental right of speedy trial of the applicant has not been infringed. 13. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history. 14. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 15. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 16. Let the applicant- Varishuddin be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 17. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 18. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 11.3.2025 KK Patel Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad