Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:67820 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40986 of 2024 Applicant :- Babeeta Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Kumar Tyagi,Virpratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Virpratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Learned A.G.A. has informed that the notice to the informant has been served on 04.11.2024. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.322 of 2024, under Sections 65(1), 61(2) B.N.S., 2023 and 3/4(2) POCSO Act, 2012, Police Station Khekada, District Baghpat, during the pendency of trial. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is not named in the FIR. The victim has informed the Investigating Officer about the name of the applicant. There is no test identification parade conducted as per Section 7 of Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that there is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 08.10.2024 and she is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 8. In the case of Rahul vs. State of Delhi Ministry of Home Affairs & Anr., AIR 2022 SC 5661, the Supreme Court acquitted the accused persons as no test identification parade was conducted as per provisions of Sec. 9 of Evidence Act. This Court in the most referred case of Asharfi and another vs. The State, AIR 1961 All 153 laid down that the object of Test Identification Parade was to give credence to the statement of a witness who does not know the accused before. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the fact that there is no test identification parade of the applicant and also taking into consideration the judgment of the Supreme Court passed in Rahul (Supra), 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. 10. Let the applicant- Babeeta, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on her 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. 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 her in accordance with law. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 12. 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 :- 30.4.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad