Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:11973 Court No. - 5 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2424 of 2025 Applicant :- Nafees Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J. By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 17 of 2024 at Police Station Chandpa, District Hathras under Sections 376D, 323, IPC. The applicant is in jail since 27.01.2024. The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the trial court on 02.01.2025. The following arguments made by Sri Anil Kumar, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Sri Shrawan Kumar Dubey, learned AGA from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail: 1. The applicant is a law abiding citizen who cooperated with the police investigations and had joined the trial. 2.The applicant never influenced witnesses or tampered with the evidence. 3. The applicant never adopted any dilatory tactics or impeded the process of the trial. 4. The trial has moved at an inordinately slow pace. The applicant is not responsible for the delay in the trial. 5. The status report sent by the trial court records that the prosecution proposes to examine 11 witnesses. 5 witnesses including the material witnesses of fact have already been examined. There is no possibility of the applicant influencing the witnesses or tampering with the evidence. 6. The victim in her testimony before the trial court has repudiated the prosecution case. The said witness has been declared hostile at the instigation of the prosecution. 7. The applicant has to gather various defence evidences to be tendered before the trial court to establish his innocence. 8. Continued incarceration of the applicant will disable him from crafting an effective defence strategy, gathering evidence in his support thereof and tendering the same before the learned trial court to absolve himself of the charges. Any further incarceration would be to the detriment of the defence of the applicant and contrary to the norms of processual fairness in criminal jurisprudence. 9. This Court in Prabhat Gangwar v. State of U.P. (Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.2586 of 2023) while considering the grant of enlarging an accused on bail for preparing his defence and gathering evidence to tender the same before the learned trial court for establishing his innocence held: "Nature and gravity of the offence is certainly liable to be considered by the court while considering grant of bail. The Court has also to factor the likelihood of whether the accused committed the offence while deciding a bail application. The court also has to determine in the facts of the case whether the accused needs to be set at liberty to frame his defence and gather evidence to refute the prosecution case and establish his innocence. The bail court has to examine whether continued incarceration would disable the accused from tendering an effective defence of his case. This is a demand of processual fairness in criminal jurisprudence. Setting an accused at liberty at large on this ground cannot be applied mechanically in all cases. The issue has to be considered in the facts and circumstances of each case while doing so. All relevant facts including the evidences in the record, the conduct of the accused during the investigation as well as trial have to be adverted to before a decision is made in this regard." 10. Considering the aforesaid parameters in light of the above facts of this case, I am of the opinion that Prabhat Gangwar (supra) is applicable to the facts of this case. 11. The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case. 12. The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to join the trial proceedings. There is no possibility of the applicant influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending. In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant- Nafees be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial. (ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. The learned trial court is directed to fix the sureties after due application of mind in light of the judgement rendered by this Court in Arvind Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. (Application U/S 482 No.2613 of 2023). The learned trial court shall ensure that the right of bail of the applicant granted by this Court is not frustrated by arbitrary demands of sureties or onerous conditions which are unrelated to the socioeconomic status of the applicant. Order Date :- 23.1.2025 Pravin Digitally signed by :- PRAVIN VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad