AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Vijay Bishnoi, J
Heard.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he is seeking bail for the petitioner only on the ground that he is in custody since year 2013 and trial has not been completed so far. Learned counsel has submitted that looking to the custody period of the petitioner, he is entitled to be released on bail.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and submitted that in the present case, five murders took place including one infant of two years of age. It is submitted that out of 56 prosecution witnesses, 45 prosecution witnesses have already been examined before the trial court. Learned Public Prosecutor has further submitted that mobile of one of the deceased has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and prosecution has also produced incredible evidence against the petitioner before the trial court. Learned Public Prosecutor has, therefore, submitted that though the petitioner is in custody from quite long, but in the facts and circumstances of the case, he is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties; perused the material available on record and taking into consideration the gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
Hence, this second bail application is dismissed.