Naveen v. State

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. praying inter alia for grant of bail in case FIR No.118/2010 registered under Sections 302/364/201/1208/34 IPC at PS Sarojani Nagar, Delhi.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner claims parity with two other accused, namely, Manoj and Rishi Dass, who have already been enlarged on bail.

3. Learned APP for the State opposes the application and submits that the petitioner is the main accused in the present case and it is at his instance that Mr.Uttam Kumar was murdered. He states that there is substantial evidence brought out during the trial to nail down the petitioner. BAIL APPLN. 1774/2013 2013:DHC:6938 '-• y

4. At this stage, counsel for the petitioner states that he does not wish to press the application. He informs the Court that out of 41 witnesses, the testimony of 22 witnesses has already been recorded before the trial court and the matter is fixed on 22nd & 23rd October, 2013 for recording the testimony of three other prosecution witnesses, including, the nodal officer of a mobile service providing company. He submits that the trial court may be directed to expedite the trial and ensure that the deposition of the aforesaid witnesses is duly recorded on the dates fixed.

5. Learned APP for the State submits that the State shall not ask for an adjournment on the dates fixed and shall render co-operation in ensuring speedy trial.

6. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with a request made to the trial court to ensure that the testimony of the three witnesses, summoned on 22nd & 23rd October, 2013, is duly recorded and the case progresses with reasonable despatch.

SEPTEMBER 27, 2013 sk/mk BAIL APPLN. 1774/2013 HIMA KOHLI, J