HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52133 of 2023 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR SINGH, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State. The instant second bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release her on bail in Case Crime No. 118 of 2022 (S.T. No. 819 of 2022), under Sections 498-A, 304-B of I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Obra, District Sonbhadra, during the pendency of trial. First bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 13.04.2023 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 52343 of 2022. Main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased who is languishing in jail since 30.06.2022, but till date her trial has not been concluded, therefore, considering the detention period of the applicant, she may be enlarged on bail. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant in the light of prosecution case as mentioned in the F.I.R. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, I find that vide order dated 25.07.2025 a report was called for from the concerned Presiding Officer Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Harish Chandra Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ratnavali Tiwari .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) with regard to present status of trial of the applicant. In response trial court submitted its report dated 22.08.2025 to this Court which is on record. As per the report dated 22.08.2025, out of 26 prosecution witnesses statements of two prosecution witnesses have been recorded on 24.06.2025 and cross-examination of PW-3 is going on, in which 16.09.2025 is the date fixed. The trial court report does not indicate any non cooperation on the part of the accused. On perusing the report, I find that the trial is being delayed by the prosecution and considering the number of prosecution witnesses there is no likelihood of conclusion of trial of the applicant in near future. Regarding long incarceration of under trial prisoners in jail due to delay in conclusion of trial, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India Vs. K.A. Najeeb, (2021) 3 SCC 713 has held as follows :- "15. This Court has clarified in numerous judgments that the liberty guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution would cover within its protective ambit not only due procedure and fairness but also access to justice and a speedy trial. In Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee (Representing Undertrial Prisoners) v. Union of India, it was held that undertrials cannot indefinitely be detained pending trial. Ideally, no person ought to suffer adverse consequences of his acts unless the same is established before a neutral arbiter. However, owing to the practicalities of real life where to secure an effective trial and to ameliorate the risk to society in case a potential criminal is left at large pending trial, Courts are tasked with deciding whether an individual ought to be released pending trial or not. Once it is obvious that a timely trial would not be possible and the accused has suffered incarceration for a significant period of time, Courts would ordinarily be obligated to enlarge them on bail." Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the detention period of the applicant, this Court is of the view that prima facie, the applicant has made out a case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed. Let the applicant-Ratnavali Tiwari, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- BAIL No. 52133 of 2023 2 (i) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable. (ii) That the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) That after her release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity. (iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned before the release of the applicant on bail. In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant. September 11, 2025 Kashifa BAIL No. 52133 of 2023 3 (Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- KASHIFA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad