Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:144984 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44138 of 2023 Applicant :- Vikas Rajbhar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Aditya Vikram,Ali Hasan,Awashesh Kumar,Kalp Dev Mishra,Virendra Kumar Kori,Virendra Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- Ajai Kumar Singh Kushwaha,G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Virendra Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Ajai Kumar Singh Kushwaha, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, 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.41 of 2023, under Sections 376, 420, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Sadat, District- Ghazipur with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have established corporeal relationship with the victim and impregnated her. After learning about the said pregnancy, the victim asked the applicant to marry her, but he refused to do so, as such, the FIR was instituted on 1.4.2023 at 04:20 p.m. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the FIR is delayed and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence. The victim is a consenting party as is but evident from her statement recorded during trial as she has been examined as PW-2, whereby she has categorically stated during cross-examination that the said relationship was out of her consent. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the truth is that applicant is not the father of the said baby-girl born to the victim, as such, it is a clear cut case of false implication and the applicant is entitled for bail. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 2.4.2023 and he came out of jail for two months only on interim bail which was granted on the prayer of the applicant to marry the victim. He is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that at the one hand the applicant is stating that he is not the father of said child born to the victim and on the other hand he is taking advantage of the statement of victim, whereby she has stated that she established corporeal relationship with the applicant out of her own consent, as such, he is not entitled for bail. 8. Learned counsel for the informant has further argued that the applicant had misused the interim bail granted to him earlier on and did not marry the victim. He has ruined the life of the victim after she gave birth to a baby-girl. 9. This Court had called for the status of trial from the concerned trial court. As per the said status report dated 11.8.2025, six witnesses have been examined and the case is fixed for statement of accused U/s 313 Cr.P.C. on 22.8.2025. 10. 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. 11. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that six witnesses have already been examined the trial is at its conclusive end, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. 12. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 13. 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. 14. 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 Vikas/- (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad