Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:11951 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29814 of 2023 Applicant :- Neeraj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Aditya,Pawan Kumar Singh,Ramdhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mahendra Kumar Maurya,Radhey Shyam Singh Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. This is the second bail application. First bail application was rejected by the Court of Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J. (now retired) Court vide order dated 18.1.2023. 2. Heard Sri Ramdhan, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Radhey Shyam Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri P.K. Giri, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri A.K. Mishra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.86 of 2022, U/S 376 and 342 IPC, Police Station Hasayan, District Hathras, during the pendency of trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the statement of the informant is contradictory. Learned counsel has cited several contradictions in the statement of the victim herself. It is stated that no spermatozoa were found in the smear of the victim, as such, the prosecution story stands falsified. 5. Learned counsel has further stated that the applicant is in jail since 18.5.2022. There is no likelihood of conclusion of trial in the near future, as such, the applicant is entitled for bail. Learned counsel has stated that the applicant has no criminal history and in case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Per contra, learned A.A.G. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the report was called from the court concerned, whereby as per the report dated 14.11.2024, six witnesses have already been examined and only one witness S.I. Prem Pal Singh Yadav remains to be examined. The trial is at its conclusive end. 7. Since no material new ground has been given by learned counsel for the applicant, I do not find it a fit case for bail. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 8. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. 9. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously, in view of the principle laid down in the recent judgements 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. 10. 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 :- 23.1.2025 Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad