Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:29522 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4042 of 2025 Applicant :- Vinit Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Adesh Kumar,G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Vivek Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Adesh Kumar, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.288 of 2024, under Sections 64(1), 115(2), 351(2) B.N.S., Police Station Hastinapur, District Meerut, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have assaulted the daughter of the informant on 13.12.2024 at about 1:00 p.m. and had outraged her modesty and caused injuries to her. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about six hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The victim was taken for medical examination the same day i.e. on 13.12.2024, but denied her medical examination, but after a lapse of four days on 17.12.2024, again her medical examination was conducted and no visible injury was observed by the doctor conducting her medical examination. Learned counsel has further stated that the victim has raised the allegations of rape during her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S. The said allegations have been made as an afterthought and legal consultation. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the instant FIR is just a counterblast to the NCR instituted by the family members of he applicant on 18.07.2024. The said NCR has been annexed as Annexure No.8 to the affidavit filed with the bail application. 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 30.12.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the victim has levelled the allegations of rape in her statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 B.N.S.S. 8. The Supreme Court in the case of Niranjan Singh and another vs. Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote and Others, AIR 1980 SC 785 has avoided detailed examination of the evidence and elaborate documentation of the merits of the case as no party should have the impression that his case has been prejudiced. A prima facie satisfaction of case is needed but it is not the same as an exhaustive exploration of the merits in the order itself. 9. 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 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. 10. Let the applicant- Vinit Kumar, 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./351 B.N.S.S. 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. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 12. 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 :- 3.3.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad