Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:112951 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4850 of 2025 Applicant :- Priyanshu Sharma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Udaybhan Shukla,Upadhyay Karan Dinanath,Vishesh Rajvanshi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State, learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record. By means of this bail application, the applicant, who is involved in Case Crime No. 349 of 2024, under Sections 376(2), 452, and 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, police station Nai Mandi, district Muzaffarnagar, seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial. As per prosecution case, in brief, the complainant /victim got a first information report lodged on 06.08.2025 for the alleged offence under Sections 376, 452, 506, 120-B IPC and 3/4 of POCSO Act against the applicant, his mother and sister, but after culmination of investigation, charge sheet was submitted against the applicant for the aforesaid offence whereas charge sheet against the mother and sister of the applicant was submitted under Sections 504-506 IPC. The main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that statement of the victim has been recorded before the trial court on 20.06.2025. Although, she has supported the prosecution case in her examination-in-chief, but when she was cross- examined, she denied the incident of rape upon her by the applicant. She has also stated inter alia that neither the applicant clicked her photograph nor made her video. She had given statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. under the threats of police personnel, hence her statement was not a voluntary statement. On putting query by the court, she has stated that since she was in relation with the applicant and he refused for marriage, therefore, she wanted to lodge FIR against the applicant for the allegations only that despite having relation with her, he refused to marry her. He has also disclosed that in March, 2025 her marriage has been solemnized with another boy. On the strength of the aforesaid statement, much emphasis has been given by contending that in the light of the aforesaid statement of the victim, there is bleak chance of conviction of the applicant, who is languishing in jail since 30.09.2024 having no criminal history. In case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate with the trial. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that victim has supported the prosecution case in her examination-in-chief, but later on she flatly refused all the allegations levelled against the applicant in her cross-examination, hence possibility of winning over the victim from the side of the accused cannot be ruled out. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, I find that it is not in dispute that victim in her cross-examination completely denied the incident of rape and she has also solemnized her marriage with another man in the month of March, 2025. Since, the trial of the applicant is going on, therefore, this Court in exercise of power under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is not scrutinizing the statement of the victim meticulously so that it may not affect the trial of the applicant. Keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case in the light of the statement of the victim as noted above, I find that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant stands allowed. Let the applicant Priyanshu Sharma, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) That the applicant shall cooperate with the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable. (ii) That the applicant shall not directly or indirectly involve in any criminal activity. In case of breach of above conditions by the applicant, it will be open for the prosecution to move bail cancellation application before the Court concerned. Order Date :- 14.7.2025 Ishrat Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ISHRAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad