The applicant filed a second bail application in a POCSO case. The bench rejected it, finding no new merit. The court directed the trial court to decide the pending case within one year citing Apex Court precedents on speedy trial.
Bail application rejected; no relief granted to applicant.
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. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6572 of 2023
Applicant :- Imran Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Kamal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
consideration the fact that the counsel for the applicant could not bring to light any new ground for pressing the bail, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant.
Order Date :- 24.2.2023
Ravi Kant
Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether fresh grounds exist given that co-accused was not identified by victim in court.
Whether applicant is entitled to bail in a repeat application where first was rejected after full consideration.
Whether trial of fact sensitive offence should be decided expeditiously.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Vinod Kumar Vs. State of PunjabReferred¶14
Vinod Kumar Vs. State of Punjab; 2015 (3) SCC 220 · Who else cites this
Hussain and Another vs. Union of IndiaReferred¶14
Hussain and Another vs. Union of India; (2017) 5 SCC 702 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Imran
State Of U.P.
3 Others
Krishan Pahal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
