The Supreme Court recently expressed concern over “inexplicable and huge delay” in the trial of a 2019 Muthoot Finance dacoity case in Nashik in which employee Saju Samuel was shot dead [Parmendra @ Gauravsing Rajendra Sinha vs State of Maharashtra].
A Bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and R Mahadevan noted that the delay was attributable to the State of Maharashtra and issued notice to the State in the matter.
The Court also voiced serious concerns over the repeated and huge delays in criminal trials in Maharashtra.
“One factor which has seriously made the Court concerned is the fact that repeatedly it has been noticing inexplicable and huge delay in trial being conducted, especially by the State of Maharashtra,” the Court observed.
The Bench noted that the FIR in the present case was registered in June 2019 and that only one witness has been examined in the trial so far.
“This speaks volumes of the conduct of the prosecution,” the Court remarked.
The Court thus directed the Nashik Police Commissioner to file a personally affirmed affidavit explaining the circumstances under which the trial has not progressed and clarifying the role of each accused person in the case.
One factor which has seriously made the Court concerned is the fact that repeatedly it has been noticing inexplicable and huge delay in trial being conducted, especially by the State of Maharashtra.Supreme Court
The Court was hearing a plea filed by the accused whose bail had been denied by the Bombay High Court.
According to the prosecution, the petitioner was one of the accused involved in the attack and had fired at the employee who later succumbed to his injuries.
The case arose from a June 14, 2019, incident in which a group of five to six armed persons entered a Muthoot Finance branch in Nashik and attempted to commit dacoity.
During the incident, an employee, Saju Samuel, was shot dead after he resisted the assailants.
The petitioner was arrested on June 25, 2019 and is facing charges under Section 396 (dacoity with murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), Section 120B IPC (criminal conspiracy), Sections 3 and 25 of the Arms Act (illegal possession and use of firearms) and provisions of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA).
His bail plea was first rejected by the Special MCOCA Court in Nashik on March 19, 2024.
He then approached the Bombay High Court seeking regular bail but the High Court rejected the plea.
Following this, he moved the Supreme Court.
Before the top court, the petitioner argued that he has been in custody for nearly seven years and that the trial has barely progressed, with only one witness examined so far.
It was also submitted that other similarly placed accused persons have already been granted bail.
After hearing the counsel, the Court issued notice on the plea and listed the matter for further hearing on April 10.
Advocates Sana Raees Khan and Dhawesh Pahuja, appeared for the petitioner.
Advocates Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Aaditya A Pande, Sushmita Pande, Adarsh Dubey and Aditya Krishna appeared for the State.
[Read Order]