Waseem Shaikh @ Pintu vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Waseem Shaikh @ Pintu vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail application not decided; interim directions only: detailed report from the court concerned on trial delay within three weeks; State and informant may file counter affidavit; case listed on 10.04.2026 in daily cause list (top ten cases) showing Sri S.K. Dubey as counsel for informant; order to be communicated to the District Judge concerned within 48 hours.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, in custody since 29.10.2023 (nearly two and a half years) in a case where his wife died due to throttling (prima facie homicidal death), should be enlarged on bail in this third bail application, in light of the delay in concluding the trial.

Court's answer

A detailed report was called from the court concerned within three weeks explaining why the trial of the case could not be concluded till date.

Ratio / Principle

The State as well as the informant were permitted to file counter affidavit in the meantime.

Key takeaways

Registrar (Compliance) of the Court was directed to communicate the order passed that day to the District Judge concerned for compliance within 48 hours.ratio¶9

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Sameer Jain, J.), interim order dated March 16, 2026 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 6538 of 2026, Waseem Shaikh @ Pintu v. State of U.P. Third bail application; the two earlier bail applications were dismissed for want of prosecution (not on merits) by Hon'ble Deepak Verma, J., who released this application to the present Bench. Counsel for the informant and the AGA pointed out that the applicant's wife died due to throttling, prima facie a homicidal death, while fairly conceding that the applicant has been in jail since 29.10.2023, i.e. almost two and a half years. The Court did not decide bail: it called for a detailed report from the court concerned within three weeks on why the trial remains unconcluded, permitted the State and informant to file counter affidavits, listed the matter for 10.04.2026 in the daily cause list (top ten cases) showing Sri S.K. Dubey as counsel for the informant, and directed the Registrar (Compliance) to communicate the order to the District Judge concerned within 48 hours.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6538 of 2026

Waseem Shaikh @ Pintu

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Ali Hasan,	Istiyaq Ali
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 67

HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.

Sri S.K. Dubey, learned Advocate filed his power on behalf of informant, today in the Court, which is taken on record.

Sri Istiyaq Ali, learned counsel for applicant, Sri S.K. Dubey, learned counsel for informant and Sri Kunwar Tejandra Bahadur, learned AGA for the State are present.

At the very outset, learned counsel for applicant submits, however, this is third bail application filed on behalf of applicant but earlier two bail applications have not been decided on merit and both the bail applications were dismissed for want of prosecution by Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

He further submits, as Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J has released the instant third bail application and this Bench is dealing with such matters, therefore, instant third bail application has been listed today before this Bench.

At this stage, learned counsel for informant and learned AGA pointed out that wife of the applicant died due to throttling and therefore prima facie it appears to be a case of homicidal death but they fairly conceded that in the present matter applicant is in jail since 29.10.2023 i.e. for last almost two and half years.

Considering the fact that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 29.10.2023 i.e. for last almost two and half years, a detailed report is called from the court concerned within three weeks, why till date trial of the case could not be concluded.

BAIL No. 6538 of 2026

2

List this case on 10.04.2026 in the category of daily cause list in top ten cases showing the name of Sri S.K. Dubey as counsel for informant.

In the meantime, State as well informant may file counter affidavit.

Registrar (Compliance) of this Court is directed to communicate the order passed today by this Court to the District Judge concerned for compliance within 48 hours.

March 16, 2026 AK Pandey

(Sameer Jain,J.)

Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad