Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:122431 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12131 of 2023 Applicant :- Bhanu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Onkar Nath,Rajesh Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,M.P.S. Chauhan Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Onkar Nath, learned counsel for applicant, Sri M.P.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the informant and Ms. Ifrah Islam, learned State Law Officer for the State. 3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.352 of 2022, under Sections 376, 305 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Harduaganj, District Aligarh with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have committed rape with the daughter of the informant aged about 16 years on 7.11.2022 at about 02:00 p.m. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about eleven hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. Learned counsel has stated that there is a video recorded statement of the deceased person in which she has implicated the applicant but the said video was opened in court and it was found corrupt, as such, it has no value in the eyes of law. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the trial is at its conclusive end as eight prosecution witnesses have been examined and there is no likelihood of the applicant tampering with evidence as only formal witnesses are remained to be examined. 7. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 8.11.2022. The fundamental rights of the applicant enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India stand violated as he is incarcerated in jail for more than two and half years. He is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned State Law Officer have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the FIR is prompt and there is injury report of the deceased person in which she has sustained two injuries on her body and the third one was complaint of pain in back of chest. It is further argued that the victim has committed suicide later on, as such, the statement of the victim tantamounts to dying declaration. The trial is at its conclusive end as only the Investigating Officer is remained to be examined, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 9. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that there is statement of the deceased person soon before her death coupled by the fact that there is injury report which corroborates the offence of rape and subsequently the victim had committed suicide, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. 10. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 11. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously in view of the principle as has been laid down in the recent judgments 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. 12. 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 :- 25.7.2025 Vikas (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad