Partly allowed

Paurush Kumar Samadhiya v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Jun 2023BAIL/20723/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected the second bail application of an accused involved in a murder case. While denying bail, the Court directed the trial court to expedite proceedings and conclude the trial within six months due to the absence of a co-accused and expired prior directions.

What did the court decide?

Second bail application rejected. Trial Court directed to expedite trial and conclude it within six months due to delay and absconding co-accused.

Paurush Kumar Samadhiya Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:125118

¶2

Court No. - 81

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20723 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Paurush Kumar Samadhiya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shantanu Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

This is the second bail application on behalf of the accusedapplicant Paurush Kumar Samadhiya involved in Case Crime No.624 of 2018 under Sections 302, 201 IPC, Police Station Bisrakh, District Gautam Budh Nagar.

¶8

The first bail application of the accused-applicant was decided by this Court vide order dated 27.9.2021.

¶9

There is no new ground in the second bail application except the delay in concluding the trial.

¶10

I find no ground to enlarge the present accused-applicant on bail.

¶11

The second bail application of the accused-applicant is hereby rejected.

¶12

However, copies of the order-sheet of the case pending before the trial court have annexed with the affidavit and a perusal of which reflect that co-accused Puttu @ Manoj is absconding and due to that, trial of the case is delayed. It also transpires from the perusal of the order-sheet that in criminal misc. bail application no.34546 of 2022, this Court has given a direction to the trial court vide order dated 29.11.2022 to conclude the trial of the case within six months. However, the said period has expired.

¶13

The learned trial court is advised to proceed in accordance with law in the present case particularly, keeping in view the specific provisions of law to meet out the cases wherein the accused has

¶14

been absconding for long. It is expected from the trial court to expedite the trial of this case without giving any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties and to conclude the trial within six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶15

Order Date :- 6.6.2023 ss

¶16

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Paurush Kumar Samadhiya v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Paurush Kumar Samadhiya v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Pratap Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ravindra Kumar @ Ravi Sagar Vs State of U.P.

Arun Kumar Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Virendra @ Veeru Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shiv Datt @ Arjun Vs State of U.P.

Meghnath Vs State of U.P.