Jitendra v. State NCT Of Delhi & ANR.

$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 624/2026 & CRL.M.A. 13415/2026 JITENDRA .....Petitioner Through:

Ms. Priyanka Deo with Mr. Amit Kumar and Ms. Yakshi Kataria, Advs.

versus STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP for the State with W/SI Kumari Neeraj and ASI Laxmi, PS Palam Village.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN

O R D E R

% 29.04.2026 1.

Applicant seeks regular bail in case arising out of FIR No.147/2021 dated 14.04.2021 registered at P.S. Palam Village for commission of offences under Section 365/376D/377/328/34 IPC.

2.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the case is motivated and FIR was registered with inordinate delay which has not been explained. She submits that prosecutrix had a malicious intent and the complaint is with the objective to fix her in-laws, and that it is a fit case where applicant should be enlarged on bail, particularly, appreciating the fact that he is behind bars for close to five years, as he was apprehended on 09.06.2021. 3.

Keeping in mind the abovesaid long incarceration period, this Court had sought a report from learned Trial Court as to within what time-frame, the trial could be wrapped up.

4.

Status report received from learned Trial Court is, however, not acceptable. Learned Trial Court, while giving its report has, virtually, specified another period of three years to conclude the trial. 5.

There are several judgments which lay down that right to speedy trial has BAIL APPLN. 624/2026 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/05/2026 at 11:12:33

to be given requisite consideration and cannot be permitted to be frustrated. 6.

Learned Addl. P.P. for the State submits that prosecutrix has already been examined and every effort would be made to record the statements of other witnesses, without any delay.

7.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that if there is some time-bound direction to learned Trial Court to finish the trial in a reasonable time, she, without prejudice to her rights and contentions, would not press the present application, at this stage.

8.

Keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the abovesaid statement made by learned counsel for the applicant, the present application is, hereby, disposed of as not pressed. 9.

Simultaneously, learned Trial Court is directed to ensure that the trial is concluded within a period of six months from the date it takes up the matter on next date of hearing.

10.

The abovesaid time-frame has been fixed, keeping in mind the long incarceration period of the applicant. If required, learned Trial Court would be at liberty to take up the case on day-to-day basis. 11.

Needless to say, the applicant would extend his best cooperation and assistance to learned Trial Court to achieve the abovesaid time-bound disposal. However, if for any reason, the learned Trial Court is unable to conclude the trial within the abovesaid time-frame, the applicant would be at liberty to file bail application afresh before this Court.

12.

The application stands disposed of accordingly. 13.

Pending application also stands disposed of.

MANOJ JAIN, J APRIL 29, 2026/st/pb BAIL APPLN. 624/2026 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/05/2026 at 11:12:33