HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33196 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. As informed by learned State Law Officer, notice to the informant has been served on 20.09.2025 but none is present on behalf of the informant. 2. Heard Sri Rahul Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer and also perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 223 of 2025, under Section 351(3) of BNS and Sections 5m/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Kotwali Sadar, District - Hathras, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have attempted to commit unnatural offence with the nephew of the informant, aged about 11 years and had even tried to commit other indecent act including the buccal coitus with him on 06.07.2025 at about 05:00 PM. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The allegations are per se false. There is no offence committed by the applicant as there is no medical corroboration of the incident. 6. Learned counsel has also stated that there is a dispute going on between the parties, as such, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case just to exert pressure on him. The applicant is languishing in jail since 10.07.2025, having no criminal history to his credit. In case, the applicant is Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rahul Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shubham .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial. 7. Per contra, learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, nature of offence, severity of punishment and also considering the delay of more than seven hours in lodging the FIR and there being no medical corroboration of the incident, prima facie I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant- Shubham, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 11. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. October 6, 2025 Siddhant BAIL No. 33196 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad