Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:38805 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45142 of 2024 Applicant :- Sumit Upadhyay Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Kumar,Vinod Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. As informed by learned AGA, notice to the informant has been served on 30.11.2024 but none is present on behalf of the informant. 3. Heard Sri Vinod Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material placed on record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.288 of 2024, under Sections 354, 376 I.P.C. and 7/8, 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Civil Lines, District Rampur, 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. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the F.I.R. 6. Learned counsel has also stated that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. The name of applicant has come up subsequently in his own confessional statement before police which has no evidentially value. There is no identification of the applicant as per Section 7 of B.S.A., as such, the identification of the applicant undertaken in C.C.T.V. cannot be taken into consideration. He has further stated that the applicant has criminal history of two cases case, which has been explained in paragraph 22 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application. 7. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.06.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant. 9. In the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648, the Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused by itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the settled law of the Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690 and Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595 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- Sumit Upadhyay, 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 will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 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 :- 18.3.2025 Jitendra Digitally signed by :- JITENDRA KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad