Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 46032 (ALL)

NARAYAN PRABHU v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

BAIL/38808/2023 · 2025-07-13

Krishan Pahal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:112405 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38808 of 2023 Applicant :- Narayan Prabhu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Nanhe Lal Tripathi,Prateek Prajapati,Rakesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- Abhilasha Singh,G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. None is present on behalf of the informant. 2. Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 16 of 2023, under Sections 376-AB IPC and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Sector 142 NOIDA, District Gautam Budh Nagar, during the pendency of trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The applicant is languishing in jail since 08.02.2023 and he is cooperating in trial. 5. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that there is a report of the trial court dated 13.02.2025 which indicates that the case was fixed for statement of accused under section 313 Cr.P.C. which indicates that the trial is at its conclusive end. 6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the severity of allegations as made in the FIR and also 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. 7. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 8. 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. 9. 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 :- 14.7.2025 Sumit S (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad