Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:110329 Court No. - 5 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18053 of 2025 Applicant :- Harsh @ Meekoo Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- D.M.Tripathi,Rahul Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Prashant Ji Pandey Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. 1. Heard Sri D.M. Tripathi, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri Prashant Ji Pandey, learned counsel for informant and Sri Alok Mishra, learned A.G.A. for State. 2. This is second bail application. First bail application of applicant was rejected by a reasoned order dated 27.05.2024. The relevant part thereof is mentioned hereinafter :- "I am of considered opinion that present is not a fit case to grant bail to applicant mainly on following reasons:- (i) Applicant before this Court is facing trial for an offence of kidnapping and rape of a minor girl aged about 15 years. Determination of victim's age is supported by her educational documents (ii) Out of proposed nine prosecution witnesses statement of victim has already been recorded as P.W.1, as such trial is proceeding. (iii) Court takes note of nature of evidence of P.W.1 which has completely supported the case of prosecution in her examination-in-chief. So far as contradictions, if any, in the cross-examination of victim is concerned, Court does not find much material at this stage since it will be subject matter of trial, as such this Court is not making any comment at this stage. However, considering that applicant is languishing in jail since 6.4.2023 i.e. just more than one year, therefore, learned Trial Court is directed to proceed further with trial and conclude it expeditiously, preferably within a period of ten months from today and in case the trial is not concluded within the aforesaid period, applicant will be at liberty to approach this Court or learned Trial Court as advised along with status of trial. 10. With the aforesaid direction, this bail application is accordingly rejected. " 3. The applicant has again approached this Court by way of filing the present Criminal Misc. Bail Application seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.115 of 2023, under Sections 363, 376 (3), 506 of I.P.C. and 3/4 (2) of POCSO Act, Police Station-Partapur, District-Meerut. 4. In pursuance of above order passed by this Court, learned Trial Court has submitted a status report dated 30.06.2025 that out of proposed 6 prosecution witnesses, 4 witnesses have been examined and at that stage, an application was filed under Section 319 Cr.P.C., which was allowed by an order dated 23.06.2025 and proposed accused Veermati is being summoned. 5. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is in jail since 06.04.2023 i.e. more than 2 years and substantial witnesses has been examined. There is no possibility that applicant may influence any remaining witness and due to summoning of co-accused the trial will be delayed. 6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for State submits that statement of victim remained consistent and now the co-accused has been summoned and, therefore, statements of prosecution witnesses already recorded will be recalled, therefore, still there is a threat that in case, bail is granted to applicant, he may influence witnesses. 7. In the aforesaid circumstances, considering that trial has though substantially progressed but due to fact that of new co- accused is being summoned, therefore, I find merit in the argument of learned A.G.A. for State that there is a still likelihood that in case, applicant is released on bail, he may influence witnesses who will be recalled to record their testimony qua to newly summoned co-accused. 8. Accordingly, bail application is rejected. Order Date :- 10.7.2025 P. Pandey Digitally signed by :- PUSHPENDRA PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- PUSHPENDRA PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad