HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16649 of 2026 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. This is third bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his earlier two bail applications have been dismissed by Hon. Krishan Pahal, J. but as His Lordship has released the instant third bail application and this Bench is dealing with such type of cases, therefore, the instant third bail application has been listed today before this Bench. 2. Heard Sri Dipanshu Kushwaha, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajiv Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 413 of 2019, under Sections 498-A and 302 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Deoria, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that however this is third bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his earlier two bail applications have been dismissed after considering the fact that he is husband of the deceased and his wife died due to strangulation but in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 10.7.2019 i.e. for last more than seven years and till date trial of the case could not be concluded. 5. He further submitted that in the charge sheet there are total ten witnesses and till date only six could be examined and prosecution witnesses inspite of the repeated summons are not appearing before the trial court and therefore, trial is being lingered without any fault of the applicant. 6. He further submitted that right of speedy trial is the fundamental right of an accused and on its violation, even in serious cases, he can be released on Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Chandan Yadav, Dipanshu Kushwaha Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Jailal Rajbhar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) bail. He further submitted that considering the long incarceration of more than seven years of the applicant, it cannot be said that his fundamental right of speedy trial has not been violated. 7. He further submitted that apart from the present case, applicant is having no previous criminal history. 8. He further submitted that therefore, considering the long incarceration of the applicant, he may be enlarged on bail. 9. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that this is third bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his earlier two bail applications have been dismissed after considering the fact that he is husband of the deceased and his wife died due to strangulation but could not dispute the fact that in the present matter, applicant is in jail for last more than seven years and there is no allegation that he is delaying the trial in any manner. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. However, this is third bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his earlier two bail applications have been dismissed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court after considering the fact that he is husband of the deceased and his wife died due to strangulation but in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 10.7.2019 i.e. for last more than seven years and till date trial of the case is still pending. 12. From the report of the court concerned dated 6.6.2026 it reflects, till that date out of ten witnesses only six could be examined and constable-Anil Yadav and Dr. D. K. Chauhan inspite of repeated summons were not appearing before the trial court. From the report of the court concerned it could not be reflected that applicant is responsible for delay in trial. Considering the report of the court concerned it cannot be said that fundamental right of speedy trial of the applicant has not been violated. 13. The law is settled that an under-trial prisoner cannot be detained in jail for ever without trial and on the ground of long incarceration even in serious cases, an accused can be released on bail. 14. Further, apart from the present case, applicant is having no previous criminal history. 15. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed BAIL No. 16649 of 2026 2 above, in view of this Court, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 16. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 17. Let the applicant-Jailal Rajbhar, 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. 18. 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. 19. 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. September 16, 2026 Ankita BAIL No. 16649 of 2026 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad