Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:38911 Court No. - 47 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41794 of 2024 Applicant :- Shiva And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Devi Dayal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Siddharth,J. Learned A.G.A. informs that notice has been served upon the informant but no one appears on his behalf. Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A for the State. There is allegation against the applicants in the FIR of committing unnatural offence. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that injury report does not supports the allegations made in the First Information Report.The applicant is in jail since 20.9.2024 and has no criminal history to his credit. On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677. and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials 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. Let the applicants,Shiva and Monu , involved in Case Crime No.229 of 2024 , under Section- 377, 506 IPC, section 5-G/6 of POCSO Act Police Station- Etmaddaula , District- Agra , be released on bail on their 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 applicants shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicants shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) In case the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (v) The applicants shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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 him in accordance with law. 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. Order Date :- 18.3.2025 Atul kr. sri. Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad