Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:35875 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45963 of 2024 Applicant :- Himanshu Malik Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Bhawesh Pratap Singh,Sanjay Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sukrampal Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Bhawesh Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri K.P. Singh, learned Advocate holding brief for Sri Sukrampal, learned counsel for the informant, as well as Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 184 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 65 B.N.S. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Titawi, District Muzaffar Nagar, during the pendency of trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The statement of the victim has been recorded as P.W. 2 and she has not supported the prosecution story. She has completely resiled from her earlier statement given to the Investigating Officer and the allegations of the FIR. The witness has been cross-examined by the public prosecutor after declaring him/her hostile. 5. 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. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 14.8.2024. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but has not disputed the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the applicant. 7. The Supreme Court in the case of Niranjan Singh and another vs. Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote and others AIR 1980 SC 785 has avoided detailed examination of the evidence and elaborate documentation of the merits of the case as no party should have the impression that his case has been prejudiced. A prima facie satisfaction of case is needed but it is not the same as an exhaustive exploration of the merits in the order itself. 8. 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. 9. Let the applicant- Himanshu Malik 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. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 11. 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 :- 11.3.2025 Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad