Allahabad High Court
ANIL SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AJAY BHANOT
Holding
Bail was denied as the applicant is a repeat offender and there is a likelihood of witness tampering, with no fresh ground for bail established.
Summary
Anil Singh, arrested on 27 July 2023 and charged under IPC sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 120B, the Criminal Law Amendment Act and the Arms Act, applied for an enlargement of bail. His first bail application was rejected on 1 July 2024. In the second application the court noted that Singh is a repeat offender and there is a real possibility of him influencing witnesses, and that no fresh ground for bail was shown. Although the applicant argued that the trial court had not complied with earlier directions and that the trial was being unduly delayed, the court found these allegations insufficient to outweigh the risk of tampering and the seriousness of the offences. Consequently, the bail application was dismissed without addressing the alleged procedural lapses. The order also directed the trial court to monitor compliance with earlier directions and to cancel bail if the accused engages in dilatory tactics.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to a repeat offender charged with serious offences including murder and conspiracy.
- Whether alleged non‑compliance with earlier court directions and trial delay constitute a ground for granting bail.
- Whether the risk of the accused influencing witnesses justifies denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25, 3
- Criminal Law Amendment Act — s. 7
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 147, 148, 149, 302, 307
Subjects
- bail
- repeat offender
- witness tampering
- trial delay
- speedy trial
- IPC
- Arms Act
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28985 of 2025
Anil Singh
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Indresh Kumar Singh, Kavita Aman,
Manoj Kumar Yadav, Mohit Behari
Mathur, Shivam Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 49
HON'BLE AJAY BHANOT, J.
This is the second bail application.
By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be
enlarged on bail in S.T. No. 1322 of 2023, Case Crime No. 0256
of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 120B I.P.C.
and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act and Section 3/25 Arms Act
at Police Station-Sarai Lakhansi, District-Mau. The applicant is
in jail since 27.07.2023.
The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this
Court on 01.07.2024.
Reliance on the bail application of co-accused Suraj Singh is
misconceived, inasmuch as, the order of granting bail to Suraj
Singh clearly records that the role of applicant is distinguishable
for the reason that the applicant in the instant case is a repeat
offender. There is every possibility of influencing the witnesses.
At this stage, no fresh ground for bail is made out.
Without going into the merits of the case, the bail application is
dismissed.
However, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the
directions issued by this Court on 01.07.2024 in Criminal Misc.
Bail Application No. 23091 of 2024 have not been complied
BAIL No. 28985 of 2025
2
with by the learned trial court. The trial is moving at a snail's
pace and shows no sign of early conclusion. The applicant is not
responsible for the delay in the trial proceedings. The
prosecution is deliberately delaying the conduct of the trial to
prolong the incarceration of the applicant. Inordinate delay in
concluding trial will lead to an indefinite detention of the
applicant. The right of the applicant to speedy trial has been
violated.
The status report sent by the learned trial court discloses that the
prosecution proposes to examine 18 prosecution witnesses to
bring home the charges. However, till date only 4 witnesses have
been examined. The eye witnesses are yet to be examined.
Prima facie, it appears that the directions of this Court have not
been complied with and this is a rather distressing state of
affairs. Disobedience of orders of this Court by the learned trial
court strikes directly at the root of the rule of law.
Learned District Judge shall look into the matter regarding prima
facie disobedience of the aforesaid directions of this Court by
the learned trial court and the cause for the delay in concluding
the trial.
It is further directed that in case the accused persons who have
been enlarged on bail do not cooperate in the trial or adopts
dilatory tactics, the learned trial court shall record a finding to
this effect and cancel the bail without recourse to this Court.
A copy of this order be communicated to the learned trial judge
through the learned District Judge, Mau by the Registrar
(Compliance) by Email.
(Ajay Bhanot,J.)
March 19, 2026
Nisha
Digitally signed by :-
nisha kumari
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…