Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:138116 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34466 of 2023 Applicant :- Suneel @ Fauji Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar Vishvakarma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shailendra Singh Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Arun Kumar Vishvakarma, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Shailendra Singh, learned counsel for the informant, Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer 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.175 of 2021, under Section 376-AB I.P.C. and Section 5m/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Agra with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that there is no injury sustained by the victim as per medical report, as such, it is a clear-cut case of false implication. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 15.04.2021 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the trial is almost at its logical end, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 6. This Court had called for the status of trial from the concerned Trial Court. As per the said status report dated 06.08.2025, the prosecution evidence is complete and the statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded on 02.08.2025 and the case is fixed for final arguments on 12.08.2025. 7. 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. 8. 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. 9. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 10. 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. 11. 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