Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:29835 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29392 of 2024 Applicant :- Munna Lal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ishwar Chandra Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. This is the second bail application filed on behalf of accused/applicant Munna Lal with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.56 of 2023, under Sections 420, 489-B, 489-C I.P.C., Police Station- Baghwala, District- Etah, during pendency of the trial. 2. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 13.07.2023. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is 74 years old and a law abiding citizen, who cooperated with the police investigation. He is languishing in jail since 07.03.2023. The applicant never influenced the witnesses and tampered with the evidence. As per the report of the concerned court dated 13.02.2025, after submission of charge sheet, cognizance has taken by the court on 03.06.2023 and the applicant has been summoned. Charges are yet to be framed. The trial is moving at a snail's pace and is not likely to conclude early. Inordinate delay in concluding the trial has led to virtually an indefinite imprisonment of the applicant without there being any credible evidence to implicate him in the offence and violates the rights of the applicant to a speedy trial. The applicant is not responsible for the delay in trial. Co-accused Suresh and Dharmendra have been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 02.12.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.38708 of 2024. Criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraph no.18 of the bail application. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that the applicant has already spent more than one year and eleven months in jail. The detention of the applicant is being perpetuated virtually without any trial as even till date charges have not been framed. Even the prosecution could not bring on record any material, which would show that the trial has been delayed on account of any fault on the part of the present applicant. There is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant Munna Lal, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the conditions that he: (i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 3.3.2025 Manish Kr Digitally signed by :- MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad