Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:138206 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30290 of 2023 Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prabhakar Pal,Rajesh Kumar Singh,Ratnesh Pratap Singh,Shalini Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for applicant, Sri V.K.S. Parmar, 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.81 of 2023, under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station Malawan, District Etah with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have committed murder of his wife as he was having illicit relationship with his sister-in-law (Bhabhi). 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that it is a clear-cut case of false implication as the applicant was not present at the place of occurrence as he was attending to his duties as he used to drive a pick-up van and had left the house at 5:00 a.m. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The trial is moving at a snail's pace. The applicant is in jail since 02.06.2023, as such, his fundamental rights enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India stand violated. He is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that it is an open and shut case as the deceased had expired within the precincts of the house of the applicant and the injury sustained by the deceased was gun shot injury and there is recovery of a gun at the pointing out of the applicant, as such, he is not entitled for bail. 7. This Court had called for the status of trial from the concerned Trial Court. As per the said status report dated 29.07.2025, two witnesses have been examined. 8. The Supreme Court in case of X vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. reported in 2024 INSC 909, has held that once the trial has commenced, it should be allowed to reach to its final conclusion, which may either result in conviction or acquittal of the accused. The bail should not be normally granted to the accused after the charge has been framed. It should also not be granted by looking into the discrepancies here or there in the deposition. 9. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the trial is at its conclusive end, 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 :- 13.8.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad