This court rejected a second bail application. Counsel failed to adduce new grounds sustaining the fresh application. The trial court was advised to conclude the trial expeditiously.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33652 of 2020
Applicant :- Ramesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Satya Niwas Prasad,Ashok Kumar Nigam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
This is second bail application of the applicant.
The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court by order dated 01.10.2019 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 29086 of 2019.
By means of the present bail application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no. 114 of 2019, under sections 376, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Rasra, District Ballia is seeking enlargement on bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant has unable to canvass any new ground, the present bail application is devoid of merit and accordingly rejected.
However, trial court is expected to gear up and conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, subject to parties render fullest cooperation in early disposal of the trial.
Order Date :- 10.12.2020 Abhishek Sri.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail on the same facts after rejection of a preceding bail application.
Ramesh
Rahul Chaturvedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
