Ankit Kumar vs State of U.P.

Court No. - 5

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4933 of 2025

Applicant :- Ankit Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prabha Shanker Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Matter is taken up in the revised call.

¶6

This is the second bail application. The applicant is in jail since 21.10.2023.

¶7

The status report sent by the trial court records that the prosecution proposes to examine 17 witnesses to bring home the charges. However, till date only 9 witnesses have been examined.

¶8

Shri Prabha Shanker Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the directions issued by this Court on 28.08.2024 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 15364 of 2024 have not been complied with by the learned trial court. The trial is moving at a snail's pace and shows no sign of early conclusion. The applicant is not responsible for the delay in the trial proceedings. The prosecution is deliberately delaying the conduct of the trial to prolong the incarceration of the applicant. Inordinate delay in concluding trial will lead to an indefinite detention of the applicant. The right of the applicant to

¶9

speedy trial has been violated.

¶10

While deciding the first bail application registered as Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.15364 of 2024 this Court had alerted the learned trial court of the right of the accused to speedy trial. Various directions were also made upon the learned trial court to expedite the trial and to implement the mandate of Section 309 Cr.P.C./346 BNSS.

¶11

Prima facie, it appears that the directions of this Court have not been complied with and this is a rather distressing state of affairs. Disobedience of orders of this Court by the learned trial court strikes directly at the root of the rule of law.

¶12

Learned District Judge shall examine the matter and send a report regarding prima facie disobedience of the aforesaid directions of this Court by the learned trial court and the cause for the delay in concluding the trial.

¶13

Learned trial court to send a separate report regarding the compliance of the said directions of this Court and cause for the delay in the trial and shall disclose the status of the trial in Case Crime No.599 of 2023 under Sections 302, 404, 120B I.P.C., Police Station Akarabad, DistrictAligarh along with the following details in tabulated form:-

¶14

(1) Dates on which chargesheet was filed and the charge was framed.

¶15

(2) Number of prosecution witnesses in the chargesheet.

¶16

(3) Number and particulars (i.e. name, nature of witness like eye witness and expert witness etc.) of prosecution witnesses proposed to be examined as per the charge sheet.

¶17

(4) List of proposed prosecution witnesses/calendar submitted before the trial court for examination during the trial.

¶18

(5) Names and number of prosecution witnesses who have been examined before the trial court with dates.

¶19

(6) Names and number of witnesses who have been summoned but have not attended the trial proceedings on the appointed dates with dates.

¶20

(7) Names and number of witnesses against whom coercive measures have been taken out with dates.

¶21

List this case on 22.07.2025.

¶22

Needless to add, none of the above observations shall be construed adversely against any judicial officer unless the District Judge comes to another conclusion.

¶23

Joint Director (Prosecution) shall file an affidavit on the next date of listing disclosing the number of witnesses proposed to be examined.

¶24

A copy of this order be communicated to the learned trial judge through the learned District Judge, Aligarh by the

¶25

Registrar (Compliance) by e-mail.

¶26

Order Date :- 17.4.2025 Pravin

¶27

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

Ankit Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankit Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Subham vs State of U.P.

Praveen vs State of U.P.

Jay Prakash Yadav vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Raju and 92 Others vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 3 Others

Jakir vs State of U.P.

Vishna Devi vs State of U.P. and 4 Others