Komal Singh vs State Of Uttar Pradesh

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(SC) 91

DIPANKAR DATTA, MANMOHAN
Komal Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Siddartha Dave, Sr. Adv., Mr. Jay Kishor Singh, AOR
For the Respondent: Mr. Adarsh Upadhyay, AOR, Mr. Kameshwar Nath Mishra, Adv., Mr. Amit Singh, Adv., Ms. Pallavi Kumari, Adv., Mr. Shashank Pachauri, Adv., Mr. Prakash Gautam, Adv., Mr. Surya Nath Pandey, AOR, Mr. Arunash Bharti Goswami, Adv., Mr. Pankaj Singh, Adv., Ms. Ranjana Singh, Adv.

ORDER :

1. Application for impleadment is allowed.

2. Leave granted.

3. The High Court by the impugned judgment and order dated 10th September, 2024 has rejected the second application for bail preferred by the appellant.

4. The appellant, figuring as an accused in FIR No.189 of 2018 dated 14th September, 2018, registered at Police Station-Baghrai, District-PRatapgarh under Sections 302, 307, 286, 506 & 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment (Act), 1932, was arrested on 16th September, 2018.

5. We have heard Mr. Siddartha Dave, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant, Mr. Adarsh Upadhyay, learned counsel appearing for the State of Uttar Pradesh as well as Mr. Prakash Gautam, learned counsel appearing for the impleader-informant.

6. The trial is in progress. The eighth prosecution witness is being examined. We are told that his cross examination is fixed today before the sessions court. The disturbing feature is that seven witnesses had been examined by the time the special leave petition came to be presented before this Court on 04th October, 2024 and during the course of the last three months, only the examination-in-chief of the eigh

Click Here to Read the rest of this document