Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 129512 (ALL)

CHIYAGOZIEMU NANSO NELSON v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. U.P.

BAIL/2447/2025 · 2025-08-19

Subhash Vidyarthi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:48439 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2447 of 2025 Applicant :- Chiyagoziemu Nanso Nelson Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Sri Santosh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mohd. Asif Khan, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the records. 2. This is the second application seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 286 of 2020, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. and Section 66(D) Information Technology Act and Section 14 of Foreigners Act, registered at Police Station Kotwali City, District Hardoi. 3. The first bail application bearing Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.2524 of 2022 was rejected by means of an order dated 04.08.2022, passed by a coordinate Bench of this court and while rejecting the first bail application this court had directed the learned trial court to proceed with the trial and reach at a logical conclusion expeditiously within a period of one year from the date of production of a certified copy of order. 4. The second bail application has been filed stating that in spite of expiry of more than three years since passing of the aforesaid order merely a single prosecution witness has been examined till date, whereas the prosecution has proposed to examine 26 witnesses. It has also been submitted on behalf of the applicant that the co-accused Kapminkhup Vaipheii has been granted bail by means of an order dated 06.11.2024, passed by another coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.9925 of 2022. 5. The learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter. 6. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, this court is of the view that while rejecting the first bail application of the applicant a direction was issued for expeditious disposal of trial on 04.08.2022 but merely a single prosecution witness has been examined during this period of three years and that a co-accused person has already been granted bail by this court, whereas the applicant is languishing in jail since 16.10.2020 and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime. 7. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed. 8. Let the applicant-Chiyagoziemu Nanso Nelson 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 magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall not leave Bharat without permission of the learned trial court (ii) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (iii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iv) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court. (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) Order Date :- 19.8.2025 Ram. Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench