Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:68208 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45617 of 2024 Applicant :- Arun Rajbhar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shadab Alam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ravindra Kumar Yadav,Sandeep Kumar Yadav Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. Learned counsel for the informant is not present. 2. Heard Sri Shadab Alam, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Amit Kumar, learned State Law Officer and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 278 of 2024, under Sections 64, 333, 351(2) B.N.S., Police Station- Mehnagar, District- Azamgarh, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have established corporeal relationship with the victim and had video recorded the said act and kept on establishing the said relationship on the pretext of making the said video viral on social media. Despite request of the victim, the applicant refused to delete the said video. 5. It is further alleged that the applicant is again stated to have barged into the house of the informant on 16.7.2024 at about 01:00 a.m. and had tried to commit rape with her. On her raising of alarm, her family members are stated to have reached there, as such, the applicant ran away from the scence of occurrence. Thereupon, other family members of the applicant are stated to have assaulted the informant and other family members. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about nine days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The prosecution story stands falsified from the fact that there is no recovery of any video whatsoever and also there is no medical corroboration of the incident. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the victim is major about 19 years old. There is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 10.8.2024 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. Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application. 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 delay of nine days in institution of FIR and there being 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. 10. Let the applicant- Arun Rajbhar, 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. 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 Vikas (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad