HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34809 of 2025 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Shri Ankit Tiwari, learned counsel for the informant and perused the material brought on record. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the F.I.R. was lodged by the applicant's daughter-in-law against her in-laws with the allegation that on 26.04.2025 her marriage was solemnized with the son of applicant and on the same she went her matrimonial home and on the same day at about 8:00 p.m. a woman came there and told that she is the wife of that son of the applicant. Thereafter, the applicant entered into her room and while pacifying her the committed wrong with her. Learned counsel further submits that the alleged incident took place on 26.04.2025 whereas the victim has been medically examined on 10.09.2025, wherein no sign of penetration were found in her internal examination. No other external injury was also found. In the medical examination report, number of assailant is mentioned as one-Devendra Yadav. In her statements recorded under Section 180 and 183 B.N.S.S. the victim has improved her case by making allegation of rape against all the accused, thus, there are material contradictions in her statements. Learned counsel further submits that entire story has been set up by the prosecution due to reason that when the victim reached her matrimonial house it came into her knowledge that this was the second marriage of the son of the applicant. Thus, the entire prosecution is a result of ill will and vengeance and the applicant has falsely been implicated in the case with malafide intention. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhishek Tandon, Mahendra Singh, Vivek Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pratap Bahadur Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that there are two cases into the credit of applicant, which criminal history has been explained in para-24 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. The applicant is in jail since 07.09.2025. 3. Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. 4. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence and without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed. 5. Let the applicant-Pratap Bahadur Yadav, be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 0314 of 2025, under Sections 64(1), 85, 115(2), 352, 351(3), 75(2), 82(1) of B.N.S., Police Station- Sarai Inayat, District- Prayagraj, on executing a personal bond and furnishing two local sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions: i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court. iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission. v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 6. In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant in accordance with law. October 9, 2025 Mustaqeem. BAIL No. 34809 of 2025 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad