Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:65289 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43097 of 2024 Applicant :- Shivam Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Akhil Kumar Srivastava, Madan Mohan Lal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Akhil Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 4. Learned A.G.A. has informed that the notice to the informant has been served on 18.11.2024. 5. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.253 of 2024, under Sections 65(1), 351(2) B.N.S. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Karchhana, District Prayagraj, during the pendency of trial. 6. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have committed rape with the younger sister of the informant on 17.07.2024 at about 1:30 p.m. by barging into her house. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is the cousin brother-in-law (Dewar) of the informant and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to family rivalry. The FIR is delayed by about 15 days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. The victim is stated to be 11-14 years old as per ossification test report. 8. Leaned counsel for the applicant has further stated that it is true that the victim was minor, but it is a clear-cut case of false implication. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 23.08.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 9. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 10. 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 the FIR coupled with the fact that there is no medical corroboration of the incident, 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. 11. Let the applicant- Shivam Yadav, 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. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 13. 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 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad