HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Dated Nainital the 18th April, 2011 6th Bail Application No. 01 of 2011 Order on the bail application of the accused. Virendra Singh Bisht S/o Late Bachan Singh Bisht ……. Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand …….. Opposite Party In Case Crime No. 347 of 2010 U/S 120-B and 409 I.P.C. Police Station Kotwali Pauri District Pauri Garhwal Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J. Heard Mr. B.S. Parihar, the learned counsel for the applicant and Shri S.S. Adhikari, the learned A.G.A. for the State. This is the 6th Bail Application. The last bail application was rejected as withdrawn by an order dated 18th February, 2011. The only ground urged is that the trial has not concluded within 60 days from the first date of taking evidence and, therefore, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail u/S 437 (6) Cr.P.C. For facility, the said provision is quoted hereunder:- “If, in any case triable by a Magistrate, the trial of a person accused of any non-bailable offence is not concluded within a period of sixty days from the first date fixed for taking evidence in the case, such person shall, if he is in custody during the whole of the said period, be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Magistrate, unless for reasons to be recorded in writing, the Magistrate otherwise directs.” In the light of the aforesaid provision, the learned counsel for the applicant made a submission that the case is triable by a Magistrate and the first evidence was taken on 18th October, 2010 and that more than six months have elapsed and the trial has not concluded. Consequently, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In the opinion of the Court before taking this ground before this Court, it would be appropriate that an application is filed by the applicant before the trial court itself. The court is of the opinion that 2 in such a situation, the applicant should file an application u/S 437 (6) of the Cr.P.C. before the trial court itself and, if such an application is filed, the trial court will consider and pass orders on it. This is necessary because the satisfaction and the reasons of the Magistrate concerned will come on the record. In the light of the aforesaid, the bail application is rejected with the aforesaid observations. (Tarun Agarwala, J.) Dated 18.04.2011 Shiv