HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8131 of 2026 Court No. - 70 HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. 2. This bail application has been moved on behalf of the accused-applicant/ Rameshchandra, for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 71 of 1999, under Sections 307, 323, 324 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Police Station Tundla, District Firozabad, during pendency of trial. 3. Learned counsel for accused-applicant, while pressing the bail application, submits that, the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case and has not committed any offence, as alleged by the prosecution. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that, no allegation against applicant has been levelled in the first information report of this case and specific role of firing has been assigned to the co-accused Purushottam, who has caused firearm injuries to the injured. The only allegation against the applicant is that, he came up with the co-accused persons carrying Ballam in his hand. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that, the accused-applicant is languishing in jail in this matter, since 2.2.2026, without having any criminal antecedents and there is no likelihood that, the accused-applicant, after release on bail, may flee from the process of law or will misuse the liberty of bail. 4. Learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of State opposes the prayer for bail of the applicant. 5. Having considered the rival contentions of the parties and having perused Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anand Kumar Pandey, Hariyali Sharma, Kamini Pandey (Dubey), Rekha Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rameshchandra .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) the record, it is evident that, the case in hand pertains to the year 1999 and about 27 years have elapsed, but charge in the said case crime has not yet been framed. It appears that, the accused- applicant is trying to avoid, first of all, the committal of the case, then framing of charge and thereafter, trial. The conduct of the applicant shows that, he is not cooperating in the matter, and is also taking undue advantage of the process of law by filing one application after another. Hence, no leniency can be given to such defaulting person. Thus, having regard to the evidence available on record against the applicant and considering the fact of charges not being framed against the applicant due to his avoidance and negligence, I do not find any good ground to release the applicant on bail. Hence, the bail application moved on behalf of applicant - Rameshchandra is hereby rejected. 6. Observations made herein-above by this court are only for the purpose of disposal of this bail application and shall not be construed as an expression of this Court on the merits of the case. 7. Learned trial Court is directed to frame the charge against the applicant forthwith and begin with the trial. 8. It is further directed, if the matter has not yet been committed to the concerned trial Court, then the matter be immediately committed to the trial Court for proceeding further in the matter. April 23, 2026 Gurpreet Singh BAIL No. 8131 of 2026 2 (Harvir Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- GURPREET SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad