Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:88145 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3856 of 2025 Applicant :- Vinod Maurya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pramod Kumar Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Counter affidavit filed today on behalf of the State, is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Pramod Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R. N. Srivastava, learned AGA for the State- respondent. 3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 85 of 2021, under Sections 302, 201 IPC, Police Station Campiarganj, District Gorakhpur, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that however, applicant is named in the FIR and as per allegation daughter of the applicant is having love affair with the deceased, therefore, applicant committed his murder but from the FIR, it could not be reflected that informant of the case was an eye witness. 5. He further submitted that even from the record, it reflects that post mortem report of the deceased does not corroborate the prosecution case. 6. He further submitted that applicant is having no criminal history and in the present matter, he is in jail since 27.3.2021 i.e. for last more than four years. 7. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that as per his instructions, trial is at it's last leg and dates are being fixed for the final argument and therefore, at such belated stage, it is not proper to release the applicant on bail. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 9. However, learned counsel for the applicant advanced number of arguments to convince the Court that it is a case of bail but from the report of the court concerned which was called by this Court it reflects that trial of the case is at it's last leg and 13.5.2025 was the date fixed for conclusion of the argument. 10. Further, learned counsel for the applicant could not apprise the Court about the fact that whether on 13.5.2025 argument has been concluded or not. Considering the stage of trial, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail, at this stage. 11. Accordingly, the instant bail application stands rejected. 12. However, it is open for the applicant, if within two months trial of the case has not been concluded then he can renew his prayer for bail. 13. It is expected that in the meantime, trial court will conclude the trial. 14. Registrar (Compliance) of this Court is directed to communicate this order to the concerned District Judge within 48 hours for information. 15. 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 :- 23.5.2025 Ankita Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad