HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32139 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Virendra Singh Yadav, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Anand Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Ram Mohit Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.33 of 2025, under Sections 103(1), 123 BNS, Police Station Aonla, District Bareilly with the prayer to enlarge her on bail. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have administered some poisonous material to the daughter of the informant aged about six years on 12.1.2025 at about 05:00 p.m., who was rushed to hospital, whereby she succumbed to the said poisonous material. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The FIR is delayed by about one day and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. It is true that organocholero insecticide was observed in the viscera of the victim, but the applicant has nothing to do with the said offence. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 30.5.2025 and she is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Virendra Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Anand Kumar Dwivedi, G.A. Saroj Alias Lalo .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the applicant has put to death a six years old girl, as such, she is not entitled for bail. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that organocholero insecticide has been observed in the viscera of the victim, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 8. 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. 9. 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. October 9, 2025 Vikas Verma BAIL No. 32139 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad