Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:41097 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13996 of 2024 Applicant :- Seetu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Apsara,Arbaz Danish,Surendra Narayan Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Ms. Apsara Arbaz, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Jai Kishan Chaurasia, learned State Law Officer and perused the material placed on record. 3. This is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.239 of 2020, U/S 304, 323, 504 of IPC, Police Station - Bilari, District - Moradabad, during the pendency of trial. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 1.3.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.31936 of 2020. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has not put forward any new ground for bail except the period of incarceration as the applicant is in jail since 29.05.2020, as such, he is incarcerated for about four and a half years. His fundamental rights enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India stands violated, as such, he may be enlarged on bail. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial. 5. Per contra, learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the NCR instituted by the victim herself tantamounts to dying declaration wherein she has categorically stated that the applicant had assaulted her, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the rival submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and also the fact that as per the report of learned Trial Court, the statement of accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C. has already been recorded after closing the prosecution evidence and the NCR lodged by the victim herself which tantamounts to dying declaration, I do not find it a fit case for bail. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 7. The second bail application of the applicant 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:- 20.3.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad