Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:24933 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1202 of 2023 Applicant :- Nazeebur Rahman Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Adarsh Shukla,Rajiv Raman Srivastava,Surya Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dr. Shailendra Sharma,Shitesh Jha Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Shri Arsh Bugga, Advocate holding brief of Shri Surya Prakash, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Akhilesh Kumar Vyas, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records. 2. This is the second bail application seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.117 of 2021 under Sections 323, 376, 506 I.P.C., Section 5M/6 of P.O.C.S.O. Act & Section 3(2)(5)A, 3(B) (i) of S.C./S.T. Act registered at Police Station- Singahi, District- Lakhimpur Kheri. 3. The first bail application bearing Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.10022 of 2022 has been rejected by this Court by means of an order dated 29.07.2022 4. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 21.04.2021 against Mujeeb S/o Ateekur, stating that the named accused had taken away the informant's daughter aged two years at about 07:00 on 20.04.2021 and he committed obscene activities with her which had left several marks on her body. 4. The medico-legal examination report mentions some bruises on buttocks and thigh, and on upper and lower lips. However, no marks of injury or sign of use of force was found on the private parts of the victim. 5. In the statement of the informant recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she stated that the applicant had taken away her daughter. In response to a specific question that in the F.I.R., the allegations have been levelled against Mujeeb, she stated that she erroneously had mentioned the name of mujeeb whereas the applicant had taken her daughter. 6. In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history. 7. A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant annexing therewith copies of statements of eight prosecution witnesses recorded by the trial Court. The informant has been examined as PW-1 and she has stated that she had lodged the F.I.R. against Mujeeb as he had caused the incident and the applicant has not done anything with her daughter. 8. The medico-legal examination report also mentions the name of the assailant as Mujeeb as per the information given by the informant during medico-legal examination. The Doctor who had conducted the medico-legal examination has been examined as PW-4 and she has stated that the informant herself had told the name of the miscreant as Mujeeb. 9. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application and he has submitted that the victim in the present case is a baby girl aged two years, the offence committed by the applicant is heinous in nature and, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 10. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the informant has mentioned the miscreant as Mujeeb in the F.I.R.; during medico-legal examination also, she mentioned the name of the miscreant as Mujeeb but subsequently, she stated that it was the applicant who has committed the offence and not Mujeeb, who happens to be the applicant's brother; the informant has stated during her examination before the trial Court that she had lodged the F.I.R. against Mujeeb as he was the miscreant and the applicant has not done anything against her daughter and that all the witnesses of fact have already been examined and in case of his release on bail, the applicant will not be in a position to influence the witnesses, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime. 11. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed. 12. Let the applicant- Nazeebur Rahman be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court. . [Subhash Vidyarthi, J.] Order Date :- 30.4.2025 -Amit K- Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench