HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32132 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Rajeev Kumar Saxena, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Durg Vijay Singh, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Sunil Kumar, 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.49 of 2024, under Sections 363, 364ए, 201, 302 and 34 IPC, Police Station Arwakatra, District Auraiya with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is not named in the FIR and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is the driver of the car which was taken on hire, as such, he is entitled for bail. The applicant is in jail since 25.03.2024 and is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the applicant was the person who is the owner of the car in which the deceased was abducted and he drove the said car alongwith the said co-accused persons and he lives in the same neighbourhood, as such, he was very much involved in the said crime. 6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajeev Kumar Saxena Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sobhan .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) the fact that the car of the applicant was used in the offence and it is admitted that the applicant drove the said car, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 7. 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 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. 8. 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. October 9, 2025 (Ravi Kant) BAIL No. 32132 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad