Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:80892 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36044 of 2024 Applicant :- Binda @ Virendra Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pushpendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Pushpendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Manav Chaurasia, learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 118 of 2020, under Sections 302/34 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Banda during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however, this is second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application has been dismissed by this Court on merit vide order dated 04.08.2023 but he is pressing the instant bail application on the ground that in the present matter applicant is in jail since 23.06.2020 i.e. for last almost five years and till date the trial of the case could not be concluded. 4. He further submits, in the charge-sheet there are as many as 14 witnesses and till date only three prosecution witnesses could be examined. 5. He further submits, after considering the long incarceration of the applicant, a report was called from the court concerned about the current status of the trial, which is on record and from its perusal, it reflects, even above witnesses could be examined after issuing the warrants, therefore, it reflects, prosecution witness are reluctant to appear before the court concerned and due to their attitude trial of the case is still pending and applicant is in jail without trial. 6. He further submits, from the record, it reflects, fundamental right of speedy trial of the applicant has been violated. He further submits, law is settled if fundamental right of an accused is violated then on this ground considering his long incarceration even in serious matters he should be released on bail. 7. He further submits, apart from the present case applicant is however having criminal history of 20 cases but his criminal history has been explained in the supplementary affidavit dated 17.01.2025 filed in support of instant bail application and except three cases all the cases were of minor offences. 8. He further submits, out of three cases one case is of Section 307 IPC and another case is under the provisions of N.D.P.S. Act and remaining one case is under the provisions of U.P. Gangster Act. He further submits, the criminal history of the applicant are not of such nature on the basis of which his bail application can be withheld ignoring his long incarceration. 9. He further submits, law is settled that ordinarily merely on the basis of criminal history bail application of an accused should not be withheld if otherwise case of bail is made out, therefore, considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, applicant should be enlarged on bail. 10. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted this is second bail application of the applicant and applicant was the principal accused who caused firearm injury to the deceased and there are number of eye witnesses but he could not dispute the fact that applicant is in jail for last almost five years and till date out of 14 witnesses of the charge-sheet only three witnesses could be examined. 11. Learned AGA however further pointed out that applicant is having criminal history of 20 cases and he appears to be hardened criminal but he could not dispute the fact that majority of cases were of minor offences and in almost all the case he is on bail. 12. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 13. However, this is second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and first bail application of the applicant has been dismissed by this Court after considering the fact that he was the principal accused, who by causing firearm injury committed the murder of the deceased and incident has been witnessed by number of witnesses but it reflects, applicant is in jail for last almost five years and till date trial of the case could not be concluded. 14. Considering the long incarceration of the applicant a report was called from the court concerned and from perusal of the report, it reflects, till date only three prosecution witnesses could be examined, however, in the charge-sheet there are as many as 14 witnesses. 15. Further, from the report of the court concerned it reflects, all the witnesses after taking coercive measures could only be appeared before the trial court, therefore, it appears, prosecution witnesses are reluctant to appear before the trial court, therefore, delay in trial cannot be attributed to the applicant and considering the fact that applicant is in jail for last almost five years, it cannot be said that fundamental right of speedy trial of the applicant has not been violated. 16. Law is settled that even in serious cases on the ground of long incarceration an accused can be released on bail. 17. Further, however, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of 20 cases but his entire criminal history has been explained in the supplementary affidavit dated 17.01.2025 and it reflects, except three cases all the cases were of minor offences and in all the cases applicant is on bail. 18. Further, this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that ordinarily merely on the basis of criminal history bail application of an accused should not be withheld if otherwise case of bail is made out. 19. In case at hand considering the long incarceration of the applicant and considering the fact that prima facie it appears, fundamental right of speedy trial of the applicant has been violated, in view of this Court merely on the basis of his criminal history it is not proper to withheld the bail application of the applicant. 20. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 21. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 22. Let the applicant - Binda @ Virendra Singh 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. 23. 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. 24. 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 :- 15.5.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad