Ajay Bhanot, J.

1. Matter is taken up in the revised call.

2. Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken in the record.

3. By means of the bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.332 of 2023 at Police Station-Mandawar, District-Bijnor under Sections 302, 147, 148, 149, 504 I.P.C. The applicant is in jail since 30.09.2023.

4. The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 02.01.2024.

5. The following arguments made by Shri Harsh Vardhan Shastri, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Surya Narain Sharma, learned counsel holding brief of Shri Mahipal Singh, learned counsel for the informant and Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned A.G.A.-I from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:

1. Vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant in the offence.

2. The F.I.R. arises out of an altercation which suddenly turned violent.

3. The first informant and his party were playing a loud DJ music in the neighbourhood and disturbing all. The incident led to an altercation which escalated into violence.

4. The applicant has not been identified as the principal offender who inflicted the fatal lathi injury to the deceased.

5. No weapon of assault has been recovered from the applicant.

6. The F.I.R. is contradicted by the medical report drawn up by the AIIMS Rishikesh which opines that the injury was caused by an iron rod.

7. The applicant claims congruency in role and seeks parity in relief granted to the co-accused persons namely, Aniket, Sumit Kumar, and Shiva @ Shivanand who have been enlarged on bail by this Court on 14.12.2023 & 29.01.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 52843 of 2023, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.51318 of 2023 and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 52843 of 2023 & Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.1330 of 2024 respectively.

8. The applicant has explained his criminal history. It is also contended that the applicant is a convenient scapegoat for the police authorities. The applicant has been falsely nominated in a number of cases only to show the proficiency of the police investigators. The said cases do not have any bearing on the instant bail application.

9. The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to cooperate with the court proceedings. There is no possibility of her influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending."

6. In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

7. Let the applicant-Chahat be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial.

(ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

8. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, interest of justice will be served by directing the learned trial court to expedite the trial.

9. The trial court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of one year from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The learned trial court shall proceed with the hearing on a day to day basis to ensure that the above stipulated timeline of one year is strictly adhered to. All witnesses and counsels are directed to cooperate with the trial proceedings.

10. The trial court has also to be conscious of the rights of the accused persons and is under obligation of law to ensure that all expeditious, necessary and coercive measures as per law are adopted to ensure the presence of witnesses. Counsels or parties who delay or impede the proceedings should not only be discouraged from doing so but in appropriate cases exemplary costs should also be imposed on such parties/ counsel.

11. The learned trial court shall issue summons by regular process as per Section 62 Cr.P.C. and also by registered post as contemplated under Section 69 Cr.P.C. to expedite the trial.

12. The learned trial court shall promptly take out all strict coercive measures against all the witnesses in accordance with law who fail to appear in the trial proceeding. Counsels or parties who delay or impede the proceedings should not only be discouraged from doing so but in appropriate cases exemplary costs should also be imposed on such parties/ counsel.

13. The police authorities shall ensure that warrants or any coercive measures as per law taken out by the learned trial court to ensure that the attendance of the witnesses are promptly executed.

14. The Superintendent of Police, Bijnor, shall file an affidavit before the trial court on the date fixed regarding status of execution of the warrants/service of summons taken out by the learned trial court.

15. In case there is a failure on part of the police authorities to execute the warrants or other coercive measures, the Superintendent of Police, Bijnor, shall state the reasons for the same in the said affidavit and also show the steps taken to execute the warrants. The Superintendent of Police, Bijnor, shall simultaneously inform the Additional Director General of Police (ADG) Bareilly Zone, about the aforesaid failure of the police authorities in the first instance to execute the warrants and coercive measures issued by the learned trial court. If required, the Additional Director General of Police (ADG) Bareilly Zone, may issue an appropriate directions to ensure that the warrants issued are promptly executed by the learned trial court.

16. The delay in execution of warrants and consequent absence of witnesses is one of the principal causes of delays in criminal trials and has to be addressed effectively by all stakeholders.

17. The counsels as well as the learned trial court are directed to comply with the directions issued by this Court in Noor Alam Vs. State of U.P. rendered in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 53159 of 2021. In case any strike happens during the course of the trial, the learned trial court is directed to ensure full compliance of the directions issued in Noor Alam (supra) so that the pace of the trial does not suffer.

18. It is further directed that in case any of the applicants who have been enlarged on bail abuses the liberty of bail or does not cooperate in the trial or adopt dilatory tactics, the learned trial court shall record a finding to this effect and cancel the bail without recourse to this Court.

19. The trial judge shall submit a fortnightly report on the progress of trial and the steps taken to comply with this order to the learned District Judge.

20. A copy of this order be communicated to the learned trial judge through the learned District Judge, Bijnor by the Registrar (Compliance) by FAX.