Allahabad High Court
SUNILversusState of UP AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- SAMEER JAIN
Holding
The bail application was dismissed as infructuous because the applicant had already been convicted.
Summary
The applicant, Sunil, filed a second bail application in a criminal case (Crime No. 224 of 2022) involving offences under Sections 363, 366, 376 of the IPC and Sections 5 and 6 of the POPCSO Act. The trial court had already convicted him of these offences. The informant’s counsel argued that the bail application was now infructuous because of the conviction, and the Additional Government Advocate raised no objection. The bench accepted that the conviction rendered the bail application moot. Consequently, the second bail application was dismissed as infructuous.
Issues considered
- Can bail be granted to an accused who has already been convicted by the trial court?
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 363, 366, 376
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 5, 6
Subjects
- bail
- conviction
- criminal procedure
- IPC
- POPCSO
- infructuous application
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5902 of 2024
Sunil
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of Up And 3 Others
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Akash Rawat, Gaurav Sharma, Pankaj
Kumar Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Ram Kumar
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. This is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant.
2. None is present on behalf of the applicant, even in revised call. However,
Sri Ram Kumar, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Rajiv Dhar
Dwivedi, learned A.G.A. for the State are present.
3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant
on bail in Case Crime No.224 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC
and Section 5/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POPCSO)
Act, Police Station Mahavan, District Mathura, during pendency of the trial.
4. At the very outset, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant
submits instant second bail application has become infructuous, as applicant
has already been convicted by the trial court and therefore, instant second
bail application may be dismissed as infructuous.
5. Learned A.G.A. has no objection.
6. In view of the submission made by learned counsel for the informant, it
reflects instant second bail application has become infructuous. Further,
even from the report of the Court concerned also it reflects applicant has
already been convicted.
7. Therefore, instant second bail application stands dismissed as
infructuous.
March 19, 2026
Ashish/-
(Sameer Jain,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
ASHISH KUMAR SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…