HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14493 of 2024 Court No. - 70 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Jai Kishan Chaurasia the learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Ashutosh Upadhyaya, learned counsel for the informant, Smt. Archana Singh, learned counsel for the High Court Legal Services/victim and perused the entire material available on record. 2. This is the second bail application filed by the applicant. First bail application was rejected by this Court vide order dated 12.12.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.49231 of 2023. 3. The applicant-Shiv Shanker Yadav @ Sataru has filed this second bail application with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Crime No.407 of 2023, under Section 376, 506 I.P.C., and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Line Bazar, District Jaunpur, the pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that after rejection of the first bail application, the trial has commenced and before the trial Court, the statement of P.W.1, P.W.2 and P.W.5 has been recorded. She further submits that though the statement of the victim is intact but that is under the pressure and therefore the same cannot be believed. She also argued that the applicant's leg was also broken on account of which iron rod has been implanted in his leg. Learned counsel next argued that the material witnesses have also been recorded therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. She further submits that though trial is in progress but is progressing at a slow pace which is not likely to concluded in near future. Learned counsel next submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashok Kumar Singh, Mahendra Pratap Singh, Pratibha Singh, Vijay Gopal Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Archana Singh, Ashutosh Upadhyay, G.A. Shivshanker Yadav @ Sataru .....Applicant(s) State Of Up And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) 22.10.2023. It is thus contended that the applicant is entitled for bail. 5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant has contended that the trial is on the verge of completion as the statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., has already been recorded. Ms. Archana Singh, learned counsel for the High Court Legal Services/victim has contended that the victim has not only in her statements recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. has supported the prosecution version but also before the trial Court, her statement is also intact and therefore offence has been committed by the applicant. It is thus contended that the present second bail application is liable to be rejected. 6. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. for the State, considering that the fact that the statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. has already been recorded and that the trial is likely to be concluded very soon. Furtheremore the statement of P.W.2 victim has been recorded, who has supported the prosecution case as well as considering the fact that no other new ground has been raised on behalf of applicant, I do not find any good reason to exercise my discretion in favour of the accused-applicant. 7. Accordingly, this second bail application stands rejected. 8. The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law. September 15, 2025 S.Ali BAIL No. 14493 of 2024 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad