Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:36599 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1713 of 2025 Applicant :- Rasik Kishor Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. 1. Rejoinder affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Notice to the opposite party no.2 was issued on 24.02.2025 and as per the office report, the same has also personally been served but neither the opposite party no.2 nor his counsel is present before this Court. 3. Under the aforesaid circumstances, the Court is proceedings in this case. 4. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 5. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in FIR/ Case Crime No. 32 of 2025, under Sections 351(3) of BNS and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Raebareli. 6. 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 next submits that the FIR is delayed by 21 hours and no explanation is given thereof. Further added that there is a material discrepancy in the statement of the victim under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and prima facie the story seems to be concocted. He also added that the medical examination has been conducted and that also do not support the story of the prosecution. Further submitted that the applicant has supported the investigation and the chargesheet has been filed, thus, there is no possibility that he would tamper the evidences. He submitted that there are three cases criminal history of the applicant which have been explained in para 25 of the bail applicant and he is languishing in jail since 22.01.2025 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. 7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. 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. 8. 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 22.01.2025; prima facie, the FIR is delayed by 21 hours and no explanation is given thereof; there is a material discrepancy in the statement of the victim under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and the story seems to be concocted; the medical examination has been conducted and that also do not support the story of the prosecution; chargesheet has been filed; 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. 9. 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. 10. Let the applicant- Rasik Kishor Singh 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 IPC (Now Section 269 BNS); (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. (Now Section 351 BNSS); 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. (Now Section 84 BNSS) 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 IPC (Now Section 209 BNS). 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 :- 26.6.2025 Mohd. Sharif Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench