sole uncorroborated testimony of the prosecutrix. It has further been submitted that the FSL report has not supported the case of the prosecution. 5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the bail application on the ground that the prosecutrix has made a consistent and corroborated statement on oath. It has been submitted that if the accused is admitted to bail, he may hamper the trial. 6. The parameter for grant of bail or refusing to do so, particularly in serious offences are very settled in Kalyan Chandra Sarkar vs. Rajesh Ranjan alias Pappu Yadav and Anr . (2004) 7 SCC 528 . However, at the same time, it has been held repeatedly that the prolonged detention in the custody during trial cannot be termed as punitive measure. The question of admitting the accused on bail on account of prolonged incarceration has come up for discussion in several cases before the Apex Court. In Union of India v. K.A. Najeeb reported as (2021) 3 SCC 713 dated 01.02.2021, the Apex Court stated that if a timely trial is not possible, courts are ordinarily obligated to release the under trial on bail and statutory restrictions do not exclude the discretion of Constitutional courts to grant bail on grounds of violation of Fundamental Rights enshrined in Part III of the Constitution. While the said judgement was passed in the context of UAPA, the said observations merit mention:-
