HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8510 of 2024 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Sri Kunwar Tejendra Bahadur, learned AGA for the State apprised the Court that on 27.02.2024 notice has been served to the informant of the case. Despite service of notice, none appeared on behalf of the informant. 2. Supplementary affidavit filed by applicant is taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Sharad Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Kunwar Tejendra Bahadur, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 4. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 228 of 2022, under Sections 376-AB IPC & 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station- Bindki, District- Fatehpur, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application has been dismissed on merit by this Court vide order dated 21.09.2023 but he is pressing the instant second bail application on the ground that in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 04.06.2022 i.e. for last more than three years and till date, trial of the case could not be concluded. 6. He further submitted that from the order sheet of the case, it reflects, till date, out of 8 witnesses of the charge sheet, only 3 witnesses could be examined, therefore, trial of the case is moving with languid pace and there is no hope of its early disposal. 7. He further submitted that victim of the case has already been examined by Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sharad Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Som Krishna Uttam Alias Raju .....Applicant(s) State Of Up And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) trial court as P.W.1, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the prosecution evidence, if applicant is enlarged on bail. He further submitted that though victim was about five years' of age and as per allegation, applicant committed rape upon her but from her medical report, it reflects, she did not sustain any injury. 8. He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history. 9. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application was dismissed by this Court after considering the fact that victim of the case is hardly five years old but could not dispute the fact that applicant is in jail in the present matter for last more than three years and till date, out of 8 prosecution witnesses, only 3 could be examined. 10. He further could not dispute the fact that there is no allegation that applicant is causing delay in trial. He further could not dispute the fact that from the medical report of the victim, it reflects, she did not sustain any injury. He also could not dispute the fact that applicant is not having any criminal history. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 12. However, this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application was dismissed by this Court after considering the fact that as per allegation, he committed rape upon five years' old girl but it reflects, applicant is in jail since June, 2022 i.e. for last more than three years and till date, trial of the case could not be concluded. Considering long incarceration of the applicant, a report was called from the court concerned about the current status of trial, which is now on record and from its perusal, it reflects, prosecution proposes to examine 8 witnesses but till date, only 3 witnesses could be examined and, therefore, there is no hope of early disposal of trial. 13. Further, from the report of the court concerned, it could not be reflected that applicant is causing delay in trial. 14. Law is settled, right of speedy trial is the fundamental right of an accused and on its violation, even in serious cases, he can be released on bail. Considering the fact that applicant is in jail in the present matter for last BAIL No. 8510 of 2024 2 more than three years and there is no allegation that he is causing delay in trial, it cannot be said that his fundamental right of speedy trial has not been violated. 15. Further, however, victim was hardly five years' old girl but from her medical report, it reflects, she did not sustain any injury. 16. Further, victim of the case has already been examined by the trial court as P.W.1, therefore, this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that even if applicant is enlarged on bail then also there is no chance of tampering with prosecution evidence. 17. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history. 18. Further, law is settled, unless proven guilty, an accused is deemed to be innocent and bail application of an accused should not be dismissed either for punitive or preventive purpose. 19. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 20. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 21. Let the applicant- Som Krishna Uttam Alias Raju be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 22. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. BAIL No. 8510 of 2024 3 23. 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. September 12, 2025 KK Patel BAIL No. 8510 of 2024 4 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad