HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31062 of 2025 Court No. - 65 (Sl. No. 146 out of 262) HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. As informed by learned State Law Officer, notice has been served to the informant on 5.9.2025. 2. Heard Sri Mansur Ali Ansari, learned counsel for applicant, Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer and perused the material placed on record. 3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 189 of 2024, under Sections 504, 506, 376(2)M IPC, 3/4 POCSO Act, 3(2)(V) SC/ST Act and 67 IT Act, Police Station Chandwak, District Jaunpur, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The victim is the consenting party as is evident from the fact that she had allowed the applicant to click her video. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence, as such, he is entitled for bail. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is in jail since 19.7.2025 and is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Per contra, learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the said video was recovered, which was sent from the mobile of the applicant, which stands proved during investigation. The applicant is visible in it making the said video and the victim is found in Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mansur Ali Ansari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Kallu .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) objectionable state, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the applicant had viral the indecent video of the victim, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 8. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously as early as possible in view of the principle as has been laid down in the recent judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab; 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India; (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment. 9. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. April 2, 2026 Shalini BAIL No. 31062 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad