Disposed

Suresh Yadav v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Allahabad HC14 May 2024BAIL/5005/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the High Court directed the trial court to examine remaining fact witnesses with expedition within six weeks to ensure disposal of the second bail application, invoking Section 309 Cr.P.C. to avoid adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Trial Court directed to examine remaining fact witnesses within six weeks with expedition; coercive steps allowed for non-cooperation.

Suresh Yadav vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 11

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5005 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Suresh Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Kinkar Upadhyay,Jagendra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶7

As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is in jail since 16.09.2022 in FIR/Case Crime No.556 of 2021, under Sections 328, 304 & 506 IPC, Police Station - Kotwali Nagar, District- Ayodhya.

¶8

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal, J. has granted anticipatory bail to one co-accused, therefore, the matter was placed before him, who has released the matter vide order dated 14.05.2024 through video conferencing.

¶9

This is the second bail application. First bail application has been rejected by Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh, J. vide order dated 13.12.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.14581 of 2022.

¶10

In terms of aforesaid order dated 13.12.2022, the bail application may be revived in case the witnesses of fact get examined.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the complainant has already been examined. He has further submitted that in the present case, there are five more fact witnesses.

¶12

In terms of the bail rejected order dated 13.12.2022 (supra), unless and until the aforesaid fact witnesses are examined, the second bail application may not be heard and disposed of.

¶13

Therefore, learned Trial Court is directed to examine the remaining fact witnesses with expedition, by fixing short dates and if possible, fix dates on day-to-day basis taking recourse of Section 309 Cr.P.C., without giving any unnecessary adjournments to any of the parties to ensure that the aforesaid

¶14

fact witnesses be examined with expedition and if any of the witnesses does not cooperate in the trial proceedings, any appropriate coercive steps may be taken against him for the reason that after the order dated 13.12.2022 having been passed by this Court, about one year and six months' period has passed. So, for examining the remaining five fact witnesses, six weeks' time is given to the learned Trial Court.

¶15

List on 18.07.2024 within top ten cases.

¶16

Let copy of this order be provided to the learned Trial Court through District & Sessions Judge, Ayodhya by the Registry of this Court within three working days for its strict compliance.

¶17

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

¶18

Order Date :- 27.5.2024 RBS/-

¶19

Digitally signed by :- RAM BIR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Suresh Yadav v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Yadav v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sudhir Saxena Vs State of U.P. C.B.I. / S.P.E. Lucknow

Vijay Shankar Bajpai @ Pappoo Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Savitri Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Umesh Dikshit vs Smt. Indra Agnihotri and 5 Others

Rohit Kumar Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Hari Kishan Sahu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Home, Lucknow