Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:38828 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47017 of 2024 Applicant :- Sarvesh @ Sandeep Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shweta Nishad Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anjani Kumar Singh,Dhirendra Kumar Verma,G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Gyanendra Kumar, holding brief of Ms. Shweta Nishad, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anjani Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant and Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer as well as perused the material placed on record. 3. Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicant today is taken on record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 660 of 2024, under Sections 70(2), 351(3) BNS and Section 5G/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Campierganj, District Gorakhpur, 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. It is next stated that the informant and the victim have been examined as PW-1 and PW-2 respectively during trial and they have completely resiled from their earlier statements and have been cross-examined by the public prosecutor after declaring them hostile. There is no likelihood of conviction of the applicant in the present case. Learned counsel has further stated that there is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 17.10.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned State Law Officer have vehemently opposed the bail application. 7. 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. 8. Let the applicant- Sarvesh @ Sandeep, 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. 9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 10. 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 Sumit S (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad