Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:113272 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46163 of 2024 Applicant :- Durgesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Chanchal Kumar Singh,Satish Chandra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. 2. Shri Pradeep Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State apprise the Court that on 15.12.2024, notice has been served to the informant. Despite service of notice, none appeared on behalf of the informant to oppose this second application for bail. 3. Heard Shri Satish Chandra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Pradeep Kumar, learned AGA for the State- respondent. 4. The instant second bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.48 of 2024, under Section 377 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Kopaganj, District Mau, 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 bail application has been dismissed on merit by this Court vide order dated 08.05.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.17686 of 2024 but he is pressing the instant second bail application on the ground that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 28.02.2024 i.e. for last almost one and half years and due to non-cooperation of informant, even her statement could not be completed before the trial court. 6. He further submits that from the order-sheet of the case, it reflects that on 05.11.2024, cross-examination of P.W.-1 i.e. informant of the case could not be completed and thereafter dates are being continuously fixed for recording her remaining cross- examination but after 05.11.2024, she did not turn up before the trial court. He further submits, from the order-sheet dated 24.01.2025, it reflects that due to her continuous absence, bailable warrants were issued against her and thereafter on 18.02.2025 trial court issued N.B.W. against her and therefore, it reflects, without the delay caused by applicant, trial of the case is being lingered on only due to lackluster attitude of the prosecution witnesses. 7. He further submits that law is settled, right of speedy trial is a fundamental right of an accused and on its violation even in serious cases, an accused can be released on bail. 8. He further submits that considering the order-sheet of the case, which has been annexed alongwith supplementary affidavit filed in support of the instant second bail application, it reflects, fundamental right of speedy trial of the applicant has been violated. 9. He further submits that applicant is having no other criminal history to his credit. 10. 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 by this Court vide order dated 08.05.2024 after considering the entire facts of the case in detail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant with regard to violation of fundamental right of speedy trial of the applicant. 11. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is having no other criminal history to his credit and he is in jail in the present matter since 28.02.2024 i.e. for last almost one and half years. 12. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record of the case. 13. This is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application has been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 08.05.2024 after considering the fact that prima-facie, it appears, he committed sodomy against fifteen years old son of the informant but it reflects, applicant is in jail in the present matter since 28.02.2024 i.e. for last almost one and half years and till date, trial of the case could not concluded. 14. From the order-sheet of the case, it reflects, however, informant of the case appeared before the trial court as P.W.-1 but till date her statement could not be completed. Record suggests that on 05.11.2024 her cross-examination was being conducted but due to paucity of time, the same could not be completed but after 05.11.2024 informant did not appear before the trial court inspite of warrants issued against her, therefore, it reflects due to the conduct of the prosecution witness i.e. informant of the case (P.W.- 1) trial is being lingered on. From the order-sheet of the case, which has been filed by the applicant alongwith supplementary affidavit, it cold not be reflected that applicant caused any delay in trial. This Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that right of speedy trial is a fundamental right of an accused and on its violation even in serious cases, he can be released on bail. Considering the record of the case, it reflects, delay is being caused by the prosecution witnesses, therefore, prima-facie, it appears that fundamental right of speedy trial of the applicant has been violated. 15. Further, applicant is having no other criminal history to his credit. 16. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 17. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 18. Let the applicant- Durgesh Kumar, 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 :- 14.7.2025 Zafar Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad