Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:65259 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41037 of 2024 Applicant :- Ritesh Gautam @ Nitesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Prakash Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Satya Prakash Singh Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. Rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Learned counsel for the informant has stated that he could not file his counter affidavit and he prays for some time to file the same. 3. Heard Sri Ravindra Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Satya Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as 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. 189 of 2024, U/S 140(4), 115(2), 64 B.N.S., 2023 and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Lalganj, District Basti, during the pendency of trial. 5. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have abducted the victim alongwith some unknown persons on 28.7.2024 at about 11.30 pm and had taken her to a secluded place and committed rape with her. After sometime, the victim gained her senses, as such, she informed her parents about the said incident and the FIR was instituted on 2.8.2024. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. It is stated that he has nothing to do with the said offence. It is stated that FIR is delayed by five days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 7. It is further stated that the victim is major, as per her own statement recorded u/s 183 B.N.S.S., whereby she has stated herself to be 19 years old but as per ossification test report, she is 18 years old. 8. Learned counsel has further stated that the allegations are serious in nature but there is no medical corroboration of the incident, as such, it is a clear-cut case of false implication. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 3.8.2024. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 9. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application but have not disputed the fact that there is no injury sustained by the victim. However, learned counsel for the informant has stated that the applicant had applied electric current to the victim, as such, he is not entitled for bail. 10. It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by learned AGA. 11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, the delay in institution of FIR and there being no medical corroboration of the incident, 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. 12. Let the applicant- Ritesh Gautam @ Nitesh, involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. (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. 13. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. 14. 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 :- 28.4.2025 Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad