Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:108460 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44758 of 2024 Applicant :- Shoab Alias Sueb Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Navnath Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pankaj Kumar Tyagi Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant today is taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Navnath Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pankaj Kumar Tyagi, learned counsel for the informant as well as Ms. Ifrah Islam, learned State Law Officer and perused the record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 9 of 2023, under Sections 376, 328, 506, 406, 411 I.P.C., Section 5/6 of POCSO Act and Section 3/5 of U.P. Prohibition and Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, Police Station Phase-2, District Gautam Budh Nagar, during the pendency of trial. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. 6. As a new ground, learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is entitled for bail as the period of incarceration is about two and half years as he is languishing in jail since 15.01.2023. There is no occasion for the applicant tempering with the evidence. The applicant is cooperating in trial. 7. Per contra, learned State Law Officer as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail on the ground that already four witnesses have been examined and the trial is at its conclusive end, as such the applicant is not entitled for bail. 8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the trial is at its conclusive end, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. 9. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 10. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously, in view of the principle laid down in the recent judgements of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment. 11. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 9.7.2025 Sumit S (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad