Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:142912 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18772 of 2024 Applicant :- Kuldeep Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ardhendu Shekhar Sharma,Atul Kumar Tiwari,Ram Babu Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- Abhishek Singh,G.A.,Pragati Singh,Rahul Singh Dahiya Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Atul Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Rahul Singh Dahiya, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Sushil Kumar Shukla, learned State Law Officer 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.385 of 2023, Sessions Trial No.414 of 2024, under Sections 498A, 304B, 323 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Syana, District Bulandshahar with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is the husband of the deceased person and has been falsely implicated in the present case. There are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons including the applicant. There was no possibility of demand of dowry from the deceased person as she was herself a police constable and was posted at Pilibhit. There was a feud between husband-wife duo regarding taking maternity leave. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the cause of death was asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. All the witnesses of fact have been examined and there is no likelihood of applicant tampering with evidence. The applicant is in jail since 22.11.2023. He is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the trial is at its conclusive end as seven witnesses have already been examined, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 7. This Court had called for the status of trial from the concerned Trial Court. As per the said status report dated 31.07.2025, the trial is likely to be concluded in near future. 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