Dismissed

Harish Chandra v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC9 Feb 2023BAIL/5947/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court rejected a second bail application filed by the applicant in a case involving offences under IPC and POCSO. Noting the applicant had already been in jail for three and a half years and co-accused were on bail, the Court dismissed the plea. However, it directed the trial court to decide the case within one year to ensure speedy justice, citing Apex Court precedents on delay.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected; direction to trial court to decide case within one year.

Harish Chandra Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5947 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Harish Chandra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

List has been revised.

¶6

This is the second bail application of the applicant. The first one was rejected by this Court vide order dated 30.09.2020.

¶7

Heard Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for applicant and Shri Rajesh Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.334 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366, 328, 376, 120B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Protection of Children From Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, Police Station Surajpur, District Gautam Buddha Nagar with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant claims bail on the ground of period of incarceration of the applicant as he is languishing in jail since 25.09.2019, by which the said time comes out about three and half years. Only one prosecution witness, informant, has been examined that too in October, 2022. There is no likelihood of the conclusion of trial in near future. Learned counsel has further stated that the co-accused persons have been enlarged on bail. There is no criminal history of the applicant.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the applicant is the main accused person and his case is not at par with the co-accused persons who have been enlarged on bail.

¶11

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the evidence on record, and also taking into consideration the fact that the applicant is the main accused person and no new ground is there to enlarge the applicant on bail, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant.

¶12

The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected .

¶13

However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously, preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of a certified copy of this order or as early as possible in view of the principle as has been laid down in the recent judgements of the Apex Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar Vs. State of Punjab; 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India; (2017) 5 SCC 702 , if there is no legal impediment.

¶14

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶15

Order Date :- 9.2.2023 Ravi Kant

¶16

Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Harish Chandra v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harish Chandra v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Shakib Vs State of U.P.

Sultan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dhanmati Devi Vs State of U.P.

Preetam Singh@ Pintoo Vs State of U.P.

Shiv Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Deepay @ Deepchandra Vs State of U.P.