ORDER : 1. Leave granted. 2. The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court by the impugned judgment and order dated 23rd August, 2024 has rejected the appellant's prayer for bail. 3. The appellant, figuring as an accused in FIR No.0873 of 2021 dated 19th September, 2021, registered at Police Station-Masuri, District-Ghaziabad under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, as well as connected FIR No.913 of 2021 dated 05th October, 2021 for offences punishable under Sections 3 and 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, has been in custody since 24th September, 2021. A gunshot injury is attributed to the appellant. 4. We have heard Mr. Davesh Bhatia, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, Dr. Vijendra Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1, 2 & 3 as well as Mr. Shubham Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.4. 5. It is not in dispute that the High Court on a previous occasion, i.e., 30th January, 2024, while rejecting the appellant's second bail application had directed that the trial be expedited and completed within a period of ten months. For reasons not attributable to the appellant, such order could not be complied with. 6. Be that as it may, we find that out of 39 witnesses proposed to be examined by the prosecution, evidence of only one witness has been recorded till date. 7. Learned counsel for the respondents submit that the appellant has criminal antecedents and, therefore, his prayer may not be favourably considered. 8. We have looked at paragraph 14 of the counter-affidavit of the respondents 1 to 3. It is revealed thereform that in two of the cases involving the appellant, proceedings are no longer pending. In one case closure report was filed on 24th April, 2016 and the other case stood quashed vide order dated 2nd July, 2024 of the High Court. Apart from the two FIRs under consideration, the appellant is involved in another case registered under Sections 386/506, IPC. 9. In view of such status of the proceedings and the nature of crime involved, we are of the opinion that the same per se do not preclude us from considering the prayer for bail on merits. 10. Apart from the two FIRs under consideration, the appellant is involved in another case registered under Sections 386/506, IPC. 9. In view of such status of the proceedings and the nature of crime involved, we are of the opinion that the same per se do not preclude us from considering the prayer for bail on merits. 10. Having regard to the slow progress of trial which makes conclusion thereof anytime soon highly unlikely as well as the period of incarceration suffered by the appellant, we are of the considered opinion that the appellant need not be kept under further detention pending trial. 11. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned judgment and order. 12. The appellant shall be released on bail, subject to such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the trial court. 13. In addition, we direct that the appellant shall diligently attend proceedings before the trial court and cooperate with the presiding officer to bring about early conclusion thereof. Should the appellant remain absent without justifiable cause, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the appellant. 14. We clarify that the observations made in this order and grant of bail will not be treated as findings on the merits of the case. 15. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed on the aforesaid terms. 16. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed.