Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:7432 Court No. - 26 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37177 of 2024 Applicant :- Sachin Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Narendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J. 1. The instant bail application has been taken up through video conferencing at Lucknow. 2. Heard Shri Brijesh Kumar Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Shri Narendra Kumar, learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as Shri Anand Vikram Singh and Shri Nitesh Srivastava, learned counsel representing the State and perused the record. 3. This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Sachin for grant of bail in Case Crime No. 615 of 2021, under Sections 354, 376(D), 452 and 506 IPC lodged at police station Deoband, District Saharanpur, during trial. 4. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that it is a case of false implication. In the F.I.R., which has been lodged pertaining to the allegation of rape, name of the applicant has not been shown as he was not named therein and all the allegations were levelled against co- accused Reeshu. However, it was in the statements of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. a new story has been cooked up wherein she has imputed allegations that she was taken in a shop owned by the co-accused Sujeet Kumar @ Surjeet Kumar and there co-accused Reeshu committed rape on her while other two co-accused, namely, applicant and co-accused Sujeet had caught hold of her hands. 5. It is vehemently submitted that there are material contradictions in the F.I.R. vis-a-vis the statements of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and even if the allegations as levelled by the prosecutrix in her statements recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. are taken as it is, it will emerge that the role of only catching and hold has been assigned to the applicant while the main accused of the alleged crime, namely, Reeshu to whom the role of committing rape has been assigned, has been granted bail by a co-ordinate bench of this Court, vide order dated 30.03.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8594 of 2022 and co-accused Sujeet Kumar @ Surjeet Kumar the role of whom is identical with the instant applicant, has also been released on bail by this Court, vide order dated 06.04.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 12403 of 2022. 6. It is further submitted that applicant is in jail in this case since 31.08.2024 and criminal history of one case is being alleged against the applicant, however, the same has been explained in paragraph no.4 of the supplementary affidavit dated 21.10.2024. There is no apprehension that after being released on bail, the applicant may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty. 7. Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that the applicant has committed an heinous offence and, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail. 8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that the applicant was not named in the F.I.R. The role of committing sexual assault has been attributed to co-accused Reeshu alone while the role of the instant applicant is only stated to be of 'catching and hold' of the hands of the prosecutrix. It has been highlighted by learned counsel for the applicant that there are material contradictions in the F.I.R. vis-a-vis the statements of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. The co-accused Reeshu to whom the role of commission of rape has been assigned, has been granted bail by this Court along with another co-accused Sujeet Kumar @ Surjeet Kumar to whom the role of catching and hold of hands of the prosecutrix was attributed. It has also been highlighted that the allegations made in the statements of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. are not finding corroboration by any medical evidence. Thus, having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case, I find it to be a fit case for grant of bail. 9. In result, this bail application is allowed. 10. Let the accused/applicant- Sachin involved in above- mentioned case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:- (i) The appellant shall not make any contact, directly or indirectly or through any social medical platform, with the informant or any other prosecution witnesses and will remain present before the trial court on each and every date when the prosecution witnesses would be in attendance. (ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial. (iii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment. (iv) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 12. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the Court concerned before the bonds are accepted. 13. 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 on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 16.1.2025 Praveen Digitally signed by :- PRAVEEN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad