HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44997 of 2024 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Case called out in the revised list. Counsel for the informant is not present. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Nagendra Kumar Mishra, learned Brief Holder for the State of U.P. Perused the record. 3. The present bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.35 of 2024, under Sections 452, 376AB I.P.C., and 5m/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Sadh, District Kanpur Dehat during the pendency of the trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the first information report. Placing reliance upon the statement of the victim recorded before the trial court dated 10.9.2025, it is contended that the essential ingredients constituting the offences punishable under Sections 375 and 376 I.P.C. and section 5m/6 POCSO Act are not made out against the applicant. The medical examination of the victim conducted on 28.2.2024 also does not support the prosecution case. It is next contended that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and has always cooperated with the investigation, and Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rohit Nandan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Anand Kumar Singh, G.A. Bhura Alias Tej Bahadur .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) has attended the trial. The trial is moving at snail's pace and shows no sign of early conclusion. The applicant cannot be faulted for the delay in conclusion of trial. The prosecution proposes to examine eleven witnesses to bring home the charges. However, till date only six witnesses have been examined. It is further contended that inordinate delay in concluding the trial has led to 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 in jail since 29.2.2024 and in case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned Brief Holder for the State opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that the essential ingredients constituting the offences punishable under Sections 375 and 376 I.P.C. and section 5m/6 POCSO Act are not made out against the applicant. The medical examination of the victim conducted on 28.2.2024 does not corroborate the prosecution case. Further, the applicant has remained confined for two years six months and, as per the status report dated 18.3.2026 sent by the trial, prosecution proposes to examine eleven witnesses. Till date only six witnesses have been examined. The prosecution could not bring on record any material, which would show that that the trial has been delayed on account of any fault on the part of the applicant. The right to speedy trial, enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution, is violated. There is inordinate delay in trial. 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 intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. BAIL No. 44997 of 2024 2 6. Let the applicant- Bhura @ Tej Bahadur involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; and, (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court. 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. September 15, 2026 S.S. BAIL No. 44997 of 2024 3 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad