Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:21495 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3857 of 2025 Applicant :- Akash Alias Dinesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. As informed by learned State Law Officer, notice to the informant has been served on 25.01.2025 but none is present on behalf of the informant. 2. Heard Sri Ramesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Sushil Kumar Shukla, learned State Law Officer and also perused the material available on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 551 of 2024, under Sections 376(2)(F), 376(2)(N), 120-B of I.P.C. and Sections 3/4, 5(L)/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Vitharichainpur, District - Bareilly, during the pendency of trial. 4. The applicant is stated to have raped the victim and subsequently agreed to marry her but after her persistence the applicant is stated to refuse with the said promise of marriage. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by about five months and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The victim is major aged about 22 years. Applicant is 24 years old and it is a matter of consensual corporeal relationship converted into criminal case by the informant. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. 5. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 29.11.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the delay in instituting the FIR and also the age of the victim, the settled law of the Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690 and Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant- Akash @ Dinesh who is involved in aforementioned case 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence. (ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 10. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 14.2.2025 Priya (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- PRIYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad