Dismissed

rambabu @ babu ji v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Mar 2023BAIL/3253/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed a second bail application filed by the applicant in 2018. Having revised the list and perused the record due to lack of appearance, the court held that mere pendency or mechanical delays do not justify granting bail. Citing Supreme Court precedent, the court emphasized avoiding routine delays and dismissed the application as infructuous.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed as infructuous due to efflux of time.

rambabu @ babu ji Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3253 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Rambabu @ Babu Ji Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Behari Saxena,J.B. Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

List has been revised. None has appeared to press the bail application. Learned AGA for the State is present. In the circumstances, I myself have perused the record.

¶6

This is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant. The first bail application was rejected by this Court vide order dated 29.8.2016. The instant bail application was filed in the year 2018. It was adjourned three times on account of nonpresence of counsel for the applicant. On 25.01.2023, no one was present to press the bail application and the case was fixed peremptorily for today. Mere pendency of the bail application cannot accrue any right in favour of the applicant. It cannot be allowed to swing years together in the cloak of pendency.

¶7

The Apex Court in Ishwarlal Mali Rathod v. Gopal, (2021) 12 SCC 612 has categorically held that courts shall not grant the adjournments in routine manner and mechanically and shall not be a party to cause for delay in dispensing the justice. The relevant para-9 reads as under:

¶8

"9. Today the judiciary and the justice delivery system is facing acute problem of delay which ultimately affects the right of the litigant to access to justice and the speedy trial. Arrears are mounting because of such delay and dilatory tactics and asking repeated adjournments by the advocates and mechanically and in routine manner granted by the courts. It cannot be disputed that due to delay in access to justice and not getting the timely justice it may shaken the trust and confidence of the litigants in the justice delivery system. Many a time, the task of adjournments is used to kill justice. Repeated adjournments break the back of the litigants. The courts are enjoined upon to perform their duties with the object of strengthening the confidence of common man in the institution entrusted with the administration of justice. Any effort which weakens the system and shake the faith of the common man in the justice dispensation has to be discouraged. Therefore the courts shall not grant the adjournments in routine manner and mechanically and shall not be a party to cause for delay in dispensing the justice. The courts have to be diligent and take timely action in order to usher in efficient justice dispensation system and maintain faith in rule of law."

¶9

It appears that either the trial has concluded or the applicant has lost interest in pursuing the matter. Therefore, by the efflux of time, it seems to have been rendered infructuous.

¶10

The application is accordingly dismissed .

¶11

Order Date :- 2.3.2023

¶12

Vikas

¶13

Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

rambabu @ babu ji v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

rambabu @ babu ji 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tarzen Shaw Vs State of U.P.

Shambhu Nath Prajapati and Another Vs State of U.P.

Vijay Bahadur Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanjay Singh @ Bachcha Vs State of U.P.

Dinesh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sandeep @ Chandan Nishad Vs State of U.P.