Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL
Teekam – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
1. Heard Sri Amit Kumar and Sri N.I. Jafri, learned Amicus Curiae for the applicant, Sri Himanshu Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. This matter was heard on 08.12.2025 and 15.12.2025. Matter was argued on the point, "whether after rejection of bail by Sessions Court on the basis of material available in the case diary, the High Court can entertain the bail application on the basis of material collected during trial though the same was not available before the Sessions Court at the time of rejection of bail application as well as the question whether the second bail application is maintainable on the basis of evidence collected during trial though at the time of rejection of first bail application by the Sessions Court as well as High Court that material was not available".
3. Learned counsel for the applicant as well as amicus curiae, learned Senior Counsel, Sri N.I. Jafari submitted that the power of High Court under Section 439 Cr.P.C./483 BNSS and Sessions Court is concurrent. The High Court can entertain the bail application on any ground even though same was not available before the Sessions Court at the time o
High Court can entertain bail applications based on new evidence collected during trial, despite prior rejections by the Sessions Court.
The High Court has the authority to grant bail under Section 389(2) despite prior denials by subordinate courts, maintaining concurrent jurisdiction to enhance access to justice.
The need for a substantial change in circumstances for successive bail applications and the limited impact of the period spent in custody and the framing of charges on the bail application.
The court emphasized the constitutional right to timely bail hearings, mandating that bail applications be resolved within two weeks, aligning with the principles of justice and the presumption of in....
Anticipatory bail applications under S.438 must typically be filed in the Sessions Court first, unless exceptional circumstances are demonstrated.
A direct application for bail to the High Court is permissible in exceptional circumstances, although the Sessions Court is the preferred forum for such applications.
Delay in trial cannot be used as a ground for bail.
A bail cancellation application cannot be pursued in the High Court after the Sessions Court has rejected it; such challenges must follow appropriate procedural avenues and respect distinctions in la....
The High Court acts as an appellate court under the Special Act, and a second appeal against the original bail order is not maintainable.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
