Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:143331 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48715 of 2023 Applicant :- Rahul Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Abhilasha Singh,Brijesh Kumar Yadav,Raghvendra Singh,Sandeep Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Indra Kumar Singh Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Ms. Mamta Mishra, Advocate holding brief of Mrs. Abhilasha Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Indra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 103 of 2023, under Sections 376 & 506 of I.P.C. and Sections 5(m)/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Sakeet, District - Etah, during the pendency of trial. 4. As a new ground, learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is in jail since 23.05.2023, as such, he is incarcerated for more than two years. His fundamental rights enshrined under Article 21 of Constitution of India stand violated. 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 counsel for the informant and learned State Law Officer have vehemently opposed the bail application. 6. This Court had called for a report regarding the status of trial and in compliance thereof, a report has been submitted by the Trial Court concerned on 23.07.2025. As per the said report, the trial is at its conclusive end as the statement of accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded on 09.05.2025 and the case is fixed for final argument. 7. 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. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the aforesaid judgement of Supreme Court and taking into consideration the fact that the trial is at its conclusive end coupled by the fact that no new ground has pointed out by learned counsel for the applicant, I do not find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. 9. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. 10. 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. 11. 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 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad