Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:77887 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40898 of 2024 Applicant :- Nadeem Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mayank Yadav,Mohd. Shahibe Alam,Vivek Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Vivek Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.222 of 2024, under Sections 64, 87, 123, 115(2), 351(2) and 318(4) B.N.S., Police Station- Singhawali, District- Baghpat, during the pendency of trial. 5. As per prosecution story, the FIR was instituted by the informant stating that his daughter has been enticed away by the applicant on 17.8.2024. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. The FIR is delayed and it was instituted the next day on 18.8.2024 at 09:24 a.m. and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. There is no time of enticing away the victim mentioned in the FIR. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that statement of the victim U/s 183 B.N.S.S. was recorded and she stated that applicant had taken her away on a motorcycle from her village to Meerut in a hotel and had given her some eatable and cold drink which was spiked, as such, she was rendered unconscious and was raped upon by him. She has stated that she bled due to said act of the applicant. 8. Learned counsel on the other hand has also argued that victim seems to be a consenting party as she had gone with the applicant on a motorcycle all the way from her village in district Baghpat to Meerut and had not raised any alarm whatsoever. She is major aged about 19 years. 9. Learned counsel for the applicant has also placed reliance on the statement of Manager of the hotel who has categorically stated that the victim, who was shown to him, alongwith one boy had come to the hotel and booked the room no.105 and stayed there for the night and went away the next day. The said statement also falsifies the prosecution story as the victim has stated in her statement U/s 183 B.N.S.S. that she had locked the applicant in bathroom and left the room. Had it been so, the applicant would not have been seen by the Manager concerned leaving the hotel alongwith the victim. 10. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that medical report also does not corroborate the prosecution story as no bleeding was observed by the doctor conducting her medical examination which was conducted on 18.8.2024 at 06:20 p.m., as such, she has been examined within 24 hours. Although it is true that a bite mark has been observed on the neck of the victim, but the said fact indicates her consent which stands fortified from the statement of the doctor concerned. 11. It is further contended by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 21.8.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 12. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 13. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the delay in institution of FIR, the circumstances as narrated by the victim in her statement recorded U/s 183 B.N.S.S. and the statement of the doctor and Manager of the hotel coupled by the fact that victim had not raised any alarm whatsoever during the said sojourn from district Baghpat to Meerut, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 14. Let the applicant- Nadeem, 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 shall not tamper with evidence. (ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 15. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 16. 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. Order Date :- 13.5.2025 Vikas (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad