Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 46427 (ALL)

VIJAY AWASTHI v. STATE OF U.P.

BAIL/13324/2025 · 2025-05-05

Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:72137 Court No. - 6 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13324 of 2025 Applicant :- Vijay Awasthi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Mohan Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. 1. Heard Sri Anand Mohan Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.P.Singh, learned A.G.A. 2. This is second bail application. First bail application of applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 18.9.2024. 3. Applicant has approached this Court by way of filing present bail application seeking enlargement on bail in S.T. No.606 of 2023 in Case Crime No.172 of 2023, under Sections 498-A,304-B, 201 I.P.C. and Section ¾ of dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Bewar, District-Mainpuri. 4. In pursuance of an order passed by this Court learned Trial Court has submitted a status report that initially in the charge-sheet 24 witnesses were proposed and till date 5 have been examined with further observation that prosecution is likely to examine only two more witnesses i.e. Investigating Officer and Fard Gawah, as such trial is at the fag end. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that he is languishing in jail since 8.4.2023 i.e. about two years and now all the material witnesses have been examined, therefore, there is no likelihood that he may influence any witnesses. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant further refers statement of mother of deceased that she was not allowed to participate in last rites of her daughter as police has stopped her as well as there is no evidence against the applicant to prove alternative charge of murder. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant fairly submitted that details of offences/charges are not correctly mentioned in the prayer clause of this application. 8. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application and submitted that the witnesses remained consistent during trial and period of detention of two years may not be considered as a prolong detention. 9. I have considered the above submissions and considering that trial is proceeding and there are evidence against the applicant also, therefore, at this stage, no case of bail is made out. Accordingly this bail application is rejected. However, applicant is at liberty to approach this Court or learned Trial Court after a period of six months if the trial has not concluded along with fresh status of trial. Order Date :- 6.5.2025 SB Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP BHATTACHARYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad