Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:37369 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5693 of 2025 Applicant :- Sakathu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Dheeraj Awasthi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Harshit Gupta,Vina Gupta Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Vakalatnama filed by Ms. Vina Gupta, Advocate on behalf of the complainant is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.19 of 2024 under sections 354B, 323, 506 IPC and Sections 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Achalganj, District Unnao. In the prosecution case it is alleged that minor daughter of the complainant, aged about 16 years, while she was guarding the paddy crop at around 7.00 a.m. on 27.9.2023 has been molested by co- accused Raju. General allegation of molesting has been leveled on the applicant and the other two co-accused persons. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the specific role of molesting the victim has been attributed to the co-accused Raju. Against the present applicant, only general allegation has been made. It is further submitted that co-accused Raju has already been granted bail by the learned Sessions Court, as evident from Annexure-8 to the bail application. The applicant seeks parity on the ground that his case stands on a better footing. The applicant has explained his criminal history of one case in paragraph 28 of the bail application. He is in jail since 29.05.2025. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the facts mentioned above. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record. On due consideration of the facts that the applicant is in jail since 29.05.2025; co-accused Raju has already been granted bail by the learned Sessions Court; the medical evidence does not corroborate the prosecution story; and considering the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNSS, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Sakathu be released on bail in aforesaid first information report number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below concerned with the following conditions: (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iv) 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. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (v) The applicant 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. (vi) 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, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. Order Date :- 2.7.2025 Madhu D.R/P.S Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench