High Court · 2025

applicant and his first bail application was dismissed after considering the fact that he is the person, who caused injury to the deceased but could not dispute the fact that applicant is in jail in the present matter since April, 2015 i.e. for last almost a decade and till date trial of the case could not be concluded.

10. He however further submits that from the report of the court concerned, it reflects, trial of the case is at its advance stage and dates are being fixed for the statements of the accused persons but he could not dispute the fact that from the report of the court concerned, it could not be reflected that applicant was responsible for delaying the trial.

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

12. However, this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his fist bail application has been dismissed by Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J. vide order dated 24.07.2019 but as His Lordship has already demitted his office, therefore the instant second bail application is listed today before this Bench as this Bench is dealing with such matters.

13. Further, it appears that the instant second bail application has been filed by the applicant on the ground that he is in jail in the present matter since April, 2015 i.e. for last almost a decade and till date trial of the case could not be concluded. Considering this fact, a report was called from the court concerned, which is now on record and from its perusal, it reflects, however, dates are being fixed for statements of the accused persons but record also suggests that prosecution witnesses were reluctant to appear before the court concerned and from the report, it could not be reflected that applicant caused any delay in trial.

14. Further, law is settled, right of speedy trial is a fundamental right of an accused and on its violation, he can be released on bail even in serious cases. Considering the fact that applicant is in jail in the present matter since April, 2015 i.e. for last almost a decade, it could cannot be said that his fundamental right of speedy trial has not been violated.

15. Further, however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of three other cases but his criminal history has been explained in the instant bail application.

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

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

18. Let the applicant- Rijwan Alias Malli 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.

19. 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.

20. 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 :- 18.2.2025/Zafar MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

applicant and his first bail application was dismissed after considering the fact that he is the person, who caused injury to the deceased but could not dispute the fact that applicant is in jail in the present matter since April, 2015 i.e. for last almost a decade and till date trial of the case could not be concluded.

10. He however further submits that from the report of the court concerned, it reflects, trial of the case is at its advance stage and dates are being fixed for the statements of the accused persons but he could not dispute the fact that from the report of the court concerned, it could not be reflected that applicant was responsible for delaying the trial.

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

12. However, this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his fist bail application has been dismissed by Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J. vide order dated 24.07.2019 but as His Lordship has already demitted his office, therefore the instant second bail application is listed today before this Bench as this Bench is dealing with such matters.

13. Further, it appears that the instant second bail application has been filed by the applicant on the ground that he is in jail in the present matter since April, 2015 i.e. for last almost a decade and till date trial of the case could not be concluded. Considering this fact, a report was called from the court concerned, which is now on record and from its perusal, it reflects, however, dates are being fixed for statements of the accused persons but record also suggests that prosecution witnesses were reluctant to appear before the court concerned and from the report, it could not be reflected that applicant caused any delay in trial.

14. Further, law is settled, right of speedy trial is a fundamental right of an accused and on its violation, he can be released on bail even in serious cases. Considering the fact that applicant is in jail in the present matter since April, 2015 i.e. for last almost a decade, it could cannot be said that his fundamental right of speedy trial has not been violated.

15. Further, however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of three other cases but his criminal history has been explained in the instant bail application.

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

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

18. Let the applicant- Rijwan Alias Malli 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.

19. 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.

20. 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 :- 18.2.2025/Zafar MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad