High Court · 2025

3. Heard Shri S. K. Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr. S. B. Maurya, learned A.G.A.-I for the State-respondent.

4. The instant second application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.391 of 2022, under Sections 376-D, 506 I.P.C., Sections 5/6 POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(v) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Jahanabad, District Pilibhit, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first application has been dismissed on merit by this Court vide order dated 07.08.2023 but he is pressing the instant second bail on the ground that applicant is in jail in the present matter since

11.09.2022 i.e. for last more than two and half years and till date out of eleven witnesses of the charge-sheet, only five witnesses could be examined by the trial court and therefore, it appears that trial of the case is moving with languid pace and there is no hope of its early disposal.

6. He further submits that alongwith supplementary affidavit dated

23.07.2025, he has filed order-sheet of the case, which suggests that inspite of repeated summons when formal witnesses including S.I. Satish Singh did not appear before the court concerned then court concerned issued N.B.W. against him and thereafter, he appeared before the court concerned and therefore, prosecution witnesses are reluctant to give evidence.

7. He further submits that from the order-sheet of the case, it could not be reflected that applicant caused any delay in trial.

8. He further submits that law is settled, right of speedy trial is the fundamental right of an accused and on its violation even in serious cases, he can be released on bail on the basis of his long incarceration.

9. He further submits that however, it is a case of gang rape but admittedly victim is aged about seventeen years and she did not sustain any injury.

10. He further submits that victim of the case has already been examined by the trial court, therefore, there is no chance of any tampering with the prosecution evidence if applicant will be enlarged on bail.

11. He further submits that applicant is having no criminal history to his credit.

12. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application has already been dismissed on merit by this Court and it is a case of gang rape but could not dispute the fact that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 11.09.2022 i.e. for last more than two and half years and till date out of eleven witnesses of the charge-sheet, only five witnesses could be examined by the trial court.

13. He further could not dispute the fact that from the order-sheet of the case, it reflects, inspite of repeated summons when prosecution witnesses did not turn up then court concerned had to issue warrants against them and thereafter they only appeared.

14. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant did not cause any delay in trial.

15. He further also could not dispute the fact that applicant is having no criminal history to his credit.

16. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

17. However, this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application has been dismissed on merit by this Court after considering the fact that victim in her both the statements recorded during investigation stated against him and it appears to be a case of gang rape but it reflects, applicant is in jail in the present matter since 11.09.2022 i.e. for last more than two and half years and till date out of eleven witnesses of the charge-sheet, only five witnesses could be examined by the trial court and therefore, it appears that trial of the case is moving with languid pace and there is no hope of its early disposal.

18. Further, victim of the case has already been examined by the trial court, therefore, there is no chance of any tampering with the prosecution evidence if applicant will be enlarged on bail.

19. Further, from the record, it could not be reflected that applicant caused any delay in trial rather record suggests that due to the reluctant attitude of the prosecution witnesses till date trial of the case is pending. Order-sheet of the case suggests, inspite of repeated summons, prosecution witnesses, who were formal witnesses, when did not appear then court concerned had to issue warrants against them.

20. Law is settled, right of speedy trial is the fundamental right of an accused and on its violation even in serious cases, he can be released on bail and considering the long incarceration of applicant of more than two and half years and the fact that there is no material which can suggests that he caused any delay in trial, it cannot be said that his fundamental right of speedy trial has not been violated.

21. Further, applicant is having no criminal history to his credit.

22. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

23. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

24. Let the applicant- Bhagwat Saran be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

25. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

26. 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. Order Date :- 31.7.2025 Zafar MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

3. Heard Shri S. K. Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr. S. B. Maurya, learned A.G.A.-I for the State-respondent.

4. The instant second application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.391 of 2022, under Sections 376-D, 506 I.P.C., Sections 5/6 POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(v) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Jahanabad, District Pilibhit, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first application has been dismissed on merit by this Court vide order dated 07.08.2023 but he is pressing the instant second bail on the ground that applicant is in jail in the present matter since

11.09.2022 i.e. for last more than two and half years and till date out of eleven witnesses of the charge-sheet, only five witnesses could be examined by the trial court and therefore, it appears that trial of the case is moving with languid pace and there is no hope of its early disposal.

6. He further submits that alongwith supplementary affidavit dated

23.07.2025, he has filed order-sheet of the case, which suggests that inspite of repeated summons when formal witnesses including S.I. Satish Singh did not appear before the court concerned then court concerned issued N.B.W. against him and thereafter, he appeared before the court concerned and therefore, prosecution witnesses are reluctant to give evidence.

7. He further submits that from the order-sheet of the case, it could not be reflected that applicant caused any delay in trial.

8. He further submits that law is settled, right of speedy trial is the fundamental right of an accused and on its violation even in serious cases, he can be released on bail on the basis of his long incarceration.

9. He further submits that however, it is a case of gang rape but admittedly victim is aged about seventeen years and she did not sustain any injury.

10. He further submits that victim of the case has already been examined by the trial court, therefore, there is no chance of any tampering with the prosecution evidence if applicant will be enlarged on bail.

11. He further submits that applicant is having no criminal history to his credit.

12. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application has already been dismissed on merit by this Court and it is a case of gang rape but could not dispute the fact that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 11.09.2022 i.e. for last more than two and half years and till date out of eleven witnesses of the charge-sheet, only five witnesses could be examined by the trial court.

13. He further could not dispute the fact that from the order-sheet of the case, it reflects, inspite of repeated summons when prosecution witnesses did not turn up then court concerned had to issue warrants against them and thereafter they only appeared.

14. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant did not cause any delay in trial.

15. He further also could not dispute the fact that applicant is having no criminal history to his credit.

16. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

17. However, this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application has been dismissed on merit by this Court after considering the fact that victim in her both the statements recorded during investigation stated against him and it appears to be a case of gang rape but it reflects, applicant is in jail in the present matter since 11.09.2022 i.e. for last more than two and half years and till date out of eleven witnesses of the charge-sheet, only five witnesses could be examined by the trial court and therefore, it appears that trial of the case is moving with languid pace and there is no hope of its early disposal.

18. Further, victim of the case has already been examined by the trial court, therefore, there is no chance of any tampering with the prosecution evidence if applicant will be enlarged on bail.

19. Further, from the record, it could not be reflected that applicant caused any delay in trial rather record suggests that due to the reluctant attitude of the prosecution witnesses till date trial of the case is pending. Order-sheet of the case suggests, inspite of repeated summons, prosecution witnesses, who were formal witnesses, when did not appear then court concerned had to issue warrants against them.

20. Law is settled, right of speedy trial is the fundamental right of an accused and on its violation even in serious cases, he can be released on bail and considering the long incarceration of applicant of more than two and half years and the fact that there is no material which can suggests that he caused any delay in trial, it cannot be said that his fundamental right of speedy trial has not been violated.

21. Further, applicant is having no criminal history to his credit.

22. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

23. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

24. Let the applicant- Bhagwat Saran be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

25. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

26. 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. Order Date :- 31.7.2025 Zafar MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad