Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:142446 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40968 of 2023 Applicant :- Shahrukh @ Tulla Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Paritosh Sukla,Prakhar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Paritosh Shukla, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, 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.87 of 2023, under Sections 302, 34 and 120B IPC, Police Station Rorawar, District Aligarh with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant alongwith co-accused person Sakir and one unknown person are stated assaulted the father of the informant with knives, thereby causing instant death of the deceased person on 28.02.2023 at about 8:30 p.m. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about four hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. Subsequently in the statement of the informant, the name of the applicant alongwith co-accused person Afzal has come up and the role of assault has been assigned to all the accused persons. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the co-accused person Afzal has been enlarged on bail by Co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.9.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.37898 of 2023, as such, the applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail. There is no criminal history of the applicant. He is in jail since 01.03.2023 and is ready to cooperate with trial. 7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the applicant is the main accused person as he was named in the FIR and there is recovery of a knife at his pointing out. The trial is at its conclusive end as nine prosecution witnesses have already been examined, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 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 the rival submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the trial is almost at its logical end, 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 as early as possible in view of the principle as has been laid down in the recent judgments of the Apex 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 :- 20.8.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad