Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:6626 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 303 of 2025 Applicant :- Mitthu @ Mithun Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ambrish Kumar Dwivedi,Abhishek Dwivedi,Aditya Narayan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 280 of 2024, under section 137(2), 87, 351(3) of BNS and 17/18 of POCSO Act, P.S.- Jaisinghpur, District - Sultanpur. 3. On 13.01.2025, the following order was passed :- "Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned AGA for the State. The learned AGA has informed that notice has been served to the opposite party no. 2 but no one has appeared. It appears that one opportunity should be given to the complainant to file objection/counter affidavit. Let the objection/counter affidavit be filed within a period of two weeks. List in the week commencing 27.01.2025, within top ten cases." 4. The Coordinate Bench of this Court had noticed that the notice has been served upon the opposite party no.2 but no one has appeared on her behalf. 5. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that the applicant is not named in the FIR and even the victim in her statement under Section 161, did not name the applicant. He also submits that even before the Doctor, the alleged victim has also not named the applicant. Further submission is that once the statement under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023 was recorded, she added the name of the applicant under duress. He next submits that in fact, there was enmity in between the family members with respect to some land and for putting the pressure over the applicant so as he may not pursue the matter, therefore, the FIR is lodged while narrating the false story. He also submits that the applicant is a law abiding citizen of 60 years of age. He next submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 24.11.2024 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. 6. Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submitted that after thorough investigation, it was found that the applicant was involved in committing offence and as such, he is not entitled for any relief. 7. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is languishing in jail since 24.11.2024; prima facie, the victim in her statement did not name the applicant but she added the name of the applicant under duress; prima facie, there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant so as to connect him with the offence coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. 8. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. 9. Let the applicant- Mitthu @ Mithun involved in the aforementioned 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, with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and (4) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 30.1.2025 Mohd. Sharif Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench