Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:144796 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34874 of 2023 Applicant :- Mahesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjeev Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Pramod Kumar Maurya, Advocate holding brief of Sri Sanjeev Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Sunil Kumar, 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.144 of 2023, under Sections 302 I.P.C., Police Station-Khajani, District-Gorakhpur with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant was found assaulting his wife on 02.05.2023 at about 01:30 AM. Applicant's mother-in-law and father-in-law went there to save the victim, however, they were also badly beaten up by the applicant. Upon dialing 112 the police personnel came at the place of incident and retrieved the victims and admitted them to hospital. Subsequently the mother- in-law Parma Devi is stated to have expired. The family members of the deceased person were informed about the said death. Father- in-law of the applicant is also stated to have expired subsequently. Despite being asked by the police to institute the FIR, the family members of the deceased person did not institute any FIR whatsoever, as such, the village Chowkidar got the FIR instituted on 11.05.2023. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the FIR is delayed by about nine days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. Even it is delayed by about five days from the date of death of the father-in-law and there is no explanation to the said delay also. There is no eye witness of the said incident. The applicant has been made accused on the basis of suspicion only. It is further argued that the trial is moving at a snail's pace. The applicant is in jail since 30.05.2023, as such, he is incarcerated for more than two years. Applicant 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 a double murder case and the deceased persons belonged to lower strata of the society and they were very poor, as such, none of the family members could garner courage to institute the FIR. The FIR has been instituted by third person i.e. Village Chowkidar, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 7. This Court had called for status of trial from the trial court concerned. As per status report dated 12.08.2025 received from the trial court concerned, four witnesses have been examined and the trial is moving on. 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 it is a double murder case coupled with the fact that trial is moving on and four witnesses have already been examined and in light of the judgment passed by Supreme Court in case of X Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. (supra), 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 :- 22.8.2025 Karan (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- KARAN KUMAR RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad