Allahabad High Court
VIJAN PAL @ VIJAY PAL @ SHAMBHUversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted as the applicant had satisfied the requirements for bail given the prolonged incarceration and lack of imminent trial conclusion.
Summary
The High Court of Allahabad considered a second bail application filed by Vijan Pal, who had been in custody since August 19, 2023, in a case registered as Crime No.421 of 2023 under Sections 498A, 304‑B of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The applicant argued that his prolonged incarceration violated his Article 21 right to liberty and that the trial was progressing slowly, with only five of the twenty‑two charge‑sheet witnesses examined. The State opposed the bail but did not refute the applicant’s submissions. After reviewing the trial‑court status report and noting the unlikely near‑term conclusion of the trial, the court found that the applicant had made out a case for bail without commenting on the merits. Consequently, the court granted bail on personal bond and two sureties, subject to standard conditions such as non‑tampering with evidence and regular appearance before the trial court.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused who has been incarcerated for over three years pending trial.
- Whether the delay in trial and the limited examination of witnesses justify bail under the principles of Article 21.
- Whether the nature of the offences (IPC 498A, 304‑B and Dowry Prohibition Act) precludes bail in the circumstances.
Legislation cited
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 304-B, 498A
Subjects
- bail
- prolonged incarceration
- trial delay
- Section 498A
- Section 304B
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- Article 21
- personal bond
- sureties
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25992 of 2026
Vijan Pal @ Vijay Pal @ Shambhu
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Bharat Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 68
(Sr. No.41 out of 114)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Bharat Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajendra
Prasad Singh, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the
material placed on record.
3. This is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant. The first bail
application was rejected by this Court vide order dated 21.07.2025 passed in
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.24932 of 2025.
4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.421 of 2023, under Sections 498A,
304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Sahaswan, District
Budaun, during the pendency of trial.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that, as a new ground, it is the
period of incarceration, as the applicant is in jail since 19.08.2023 and has
been incarcerated for more than three years. The fundamental rights of the
applicant enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India stand
violated. The trial is moving at a snail's pace, as only five witnesses have
been examined to date. The applicant is ready to cooperate with the trial. In
case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
6. Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application
but could not dispute the submissions made by the counsel for the applicant.
BAIL No. 25992 of 2026
2
7. This Court had called for the status of trial from the concerned Trial
Court. As per the said status report dated 03.08.2026, five witnesses have
been examined till 28.07.2026 and there are twenty two witnesses mentioned
in the charge-sheet.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into
consideration the period of incarceration of the applicant and there being no
likelihood of conclusion of trial in near future, and without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant
has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
9. Let the applicant- Vijan Pal @ Vijay Pal @ Shambhu, be released on
bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the
court concerned, subject to verification of sureties, with the conditions that
he shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear
before the trial court as required.
10. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The
observations herein shall not affect the trial on merits.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
September 17, 2026
(Ravi Kant)
Digitally signed by :-
RAVI KANT
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…