Allahabad High Court
OM PRAKASH @ LALLAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
Since the earlier bail application was rejected on merit, the anticipatory bail could not be granted.
Summary
The applicant sought anticipatory bail in a case involving offences under Sections 376, 452, 506 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act, claiming that he had been in jail for four years without any witness examination. The court noted that this was the second bail application and that the first bail application had already been rejected on merit. Consequently, the court found no basis to grant anticipatory bail. The application was dismissed, but the trial court was directed to expedite the trial within six months of the order. If the trial is not concluded within that period, the applicant may file a fresh bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when a prior bail application on the same charges has been rejected on merit
- Whether the prolonged pre‑trial detention without witness examination justifies granting bail
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 376, 452, 506
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- IPC
- POCSO Act
- trial delay
- bail rejection
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50573 of 2023
Om Prakash @ Lalla
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ken Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 72
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Mr. Ken Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr.
Ashish Kumar Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused
the record.
2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory
bail in Case Crime No.- 93 of 2022, under Sections 376, 452, 506
of I.P.C. and 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Chirgaon, District
Jhansi, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may
be released on bail.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that this is
second bail application filed on behalf of applicant and his first
bail application has been rejected on merit. It is further submitted
that the applicant is languishing in jail for the last four years and
there is no likelihood that the trial will be concluded in near
future as no witness has been examined so far.
4. Since the first bail application of the applicant has already been
rejected on merit, no case for grant of bail is made out.
5. The application is dismissed, accordingly,
6. However, the learned trial court is directed to make all possible
BAIL No. 50573 of 2023
2
efforts to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a
period of six months from the date of production of a certified
copy of this order. In case the trial is not concluded within the
aforesaid period, it shall be open to the applicant to move a fresh
bail application before the appropriate court, in accordance with
law.
March 18, 2026
Virendra
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
VIRENDRA KUMAR BHARTEEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…