Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 70025 (ALL)

DEVIDEEN v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

BAIL/23063/2025 · 2025-09-23

Sanjay Kumar Singh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23063 of 2025 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR SINGH, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant. The instant second bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 270 of 2023, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 363, 366A, 427, 376(2)(N) I.P.C., Sections 5(L)/6 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mau, District Chitrakoot, during the pendency of trial. First bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 02.01.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 36853 of 2024. Main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is languishing in jail since 28.07.2024, but till date not a single prosecution witness has been examined before the trial court, therefore, considering the detention period of the applicant, he may be enlarged on bail. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant on merits but could not dispute the above factual aspect of the matter as argued on behalf of the applicant. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that F.I.R. of this case was lodged on 16.11.2023. After submission of charge sheet, charge was framed against the applicant on 17.09.2024. Thereafter, dates were fixed for evidence on 23.10.2024, 19.11.2024, 04.12.2024, 01.01.2025, 29.01.2025, 06.03.2025, 20.03.2025, 03.04.2025, 17.04.2025. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vishvajit Tiwari, Yogesh Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ashish Dwivedi, G.A., Shivam Dubey Devideen .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) 01.05.2025 and 15.05.2025, but not a single prosecution witness appeared before the trial court, whereas in view of Section 35(2) of the POCSO Act, the Special Courts are duty bound to complete the trial as far as possible within a period of one year from the date of taking cognizance. In the present case no sincere effort has been made by the prosecution to get the trial of the applicant completed in terms of Section 35(2) of the POCSO Act. On perusal of order-sheet, I find that the trial is not effectively proceeding, hence considering 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-Devideen, 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: (i) That the applicant shall cooperate with 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 his 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. Trial court is directed to make an endeavour to conclude the trial of the applicant in the light of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Alakh Alok Srivastava Vs. Union of India and others, (2018) 17 SCC 291. Copy of this order be sent to the concerned trial court for necessary information and compliance. September 24, 2025 Kashifa BAIL No. 23063 of 2025 2 (Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- KASHIFA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad