Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:39506 Court No. - 17 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4799 of 2025 Applicant :- Dori Lal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.Thru. Secy.Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Tripathi,Vijay Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State of U.P. and perused the record. 2. The instant second bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.343 of 2021, under Sections 395, 412 I.P.C., Police Station Pali, District Hardoi. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that earlier the applicant was implicated in 15 cases and in the present case his involvement is found on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused, namely, Pradeep. The applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is in jail since 14.10.2021. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on 05.05.2023 with a direction to the trial court to conclude the trial, expeditiously without giving unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties but, till today, even charge has not been framed in the case of the applicant. He further submitted that there is no possibility of conclusion of trial in the present case in near future. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. He further submitted that in case of being enlarged on bail, the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail. 4. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submitted that applicant is having criminal antecedent of 16 cases and as sufficient evidence was found against him he was taken into custody and charge-sheet was submitted by the Investigating Officer against him but he does not dispute the fact that the applicant is in jail since 14.10.2021 and till today even charge has not been framed in the case of applicant. 5. It transpires from the record that in compliance of earlier order passed by this Court, learned trial Judge has forwarded a report dated 28.06.2025 which clearly reveals that charge has not been framed against the applicant till today as co-accused Pradeep is not appearing before the trial court though bailable warrants are being issued against him. 6. Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of FIR and bail rejection order dated 05.05.2023 as well as report of learned trial Judge dated 28.06.2025, this Court finds that on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused involvement of the present applicant was found in the present case and he was taken into custody on 14.10.2021 and since then he is in jail and thereafter charge-sheet was submitted but it is admitted in the report of learned trial Judge that till today charge has not been framed against the applicant, in such circumstances this Court is of the view that once the prosecution has failed to ensure the presence of co-accused as a result charge is not being framed and the applicant is incarceration since 14.10.2021 therefore, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. Let the applicant Dori Lal, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions: (i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iv) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229- A IPC. (v) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC. (vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Order Date :- 10.7.2025. Rks. Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench