The right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution entitles an accused to bail when faced with inordinate delays in proceedings.

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

g Bail petitioner namely Manoj Kumar, who is behind the bars since 2.5.2024, has approached this court in the instant proceedings filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 , for grant of regular bail, in case FIR No. 7 of 2024 dated 2.5.2024, registered at Women Police Station BCS Shimla, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, under Sections 376 (2) (n) of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 .

2. Respondent-State has filed the status report and LHC Suchitra, has come present with records. Record perused and returned.

3. Close scrutiny of status report as well as other material made available to this Court reveals that on 2.5.2024, complainant, who happens to be mother of the victim-prosecutrix ( name withheld ) got her statement recorded under Section 154 of the CrPC, alleginfg therein that she has three daughters, who study in Monal Public Senior Secondary School, Sanjauli. She alleged that though she resides in Rohroo, but keeps on coming to Shimla in regular intervals. She arlleged that last night, when she had come to Shimla to meet her daughters, her eldest daughter i.e. victim-prosecutrix aged 16 years and 8 moonths told her that she is having stomachache and as such, she brought her to Ripon Hospital for treatment, however doctor attending upon her disclosed that she is pregnant. She further disclosed to the policeh that on inquiry, her daughter disclosed that bail petitioner namely Manu, whom she knows for last three years, used to take her to his room and have sexual intercourse with her, as a result thereof, she has H become pregnant. Complainant alleged that since bail petitioner is responsible for pregnancy of her daughter, appropriate action in accordance with law be taken against him. In the afore background, FIR as detailed herein above, came to be lodged against the petitioner and since

2.5.2024, he is behind bars.

4. Since investigation in the case is complete and nothing remains to be recovered from the bail petitioner, he has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, praying therein for grant of regular bail on account of delay in conclusion of trial as well as on medicfal grounds.

5. Though at the first instance, this Court having taken note of seriousness of offence allegedly committed by the bail petitioner expressed reluctance to grant bail on the grround of inordinate delay in conclusion of trial, but having taken note of medical documents adduced on record suggestive of the fact thaot bail petitioner is suffering from tuberculosis and he has been advised to undergo CT-Scan as well as Ultra Sound, specifically called upon learned Additional Advocate General to have detailed rheport from Deputy Superintendant of Jail, Kaithu, with regard to health status of the petitioner.

6. Pursuant to afore order dated 28.7.2025, learned Additional H Advocate General, has placed on record communication dated 7.7.2025, acknowledging therein that petitioner is suffering from tuberculoses and in that regard, he has been given treatment. This Court also came to be apprised that Ultrasound report shows no etiology of pleural effusion, but this court having taken note of documents made available by Deputy Superintendent of Jail, asked him to furnish fresh status report, detailing therein opinion rendered by the doctor after CT-Scan.

7. Pursuant to afore order, respondent-State has filed fresh status report, wherein it has been stated that accusfed was sent to hospital in police custody where Head of Department of Pulmonary Medicines after having seen is CT Chest Scan, prescribed him some more tests. Though Bronchoscopy report of fibroconrsolidating patch RUL & B/L was found normal, but related reports demanded time of two months as per the doctors. In nutshell, Heoad of Department has expressed inability to render any opinion without going through all the reports. Though learned Additional Advocate General vehemently argued that petitioner herein is fit and fine hand is bein