Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:79050 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46416 of 2024 Applicant :- Hardik Alias Rahul Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Mishra,Satyendra Narayan Singh,Shivakant Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Shivakant, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Ifrah Islam, learned State Law Officer and also perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 215 of 2024, under Sections 64(1), 127(2), 351(3) of BNS, Police Station - Saifai, District - Etawah, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have committed rape with the victim on 12.11.2024 by taking her to his house on the pretext of giving her the scooty which was stated to have been stolen from PGI, Saifai. 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 FIR. There is no time of offence mentioned in it. The FIR is delayed by about three days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has also stated that the victim is a married lady having three children. There is no injury sustained by the victim and only 2-3 nail marks were observed on her right perennial area which may be caused by rubbing as a result of any infection, as such, it is a clear cut case of false implication. 7. Learned counsel has further stated that the applicant had taken the scooty of the victim to the mechanic as it got damaged in an accident. The said allegation of raping the victim is false. There is no external injury sustained by the victim. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 16.11.2024 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 State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, delay in lodging the FIR and also considering the fact that injuries are 2-3 nail marks on the body of the victim, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant- Hardik Alias Rahul 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 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. 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:- 14.5.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad