Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:67929 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5693 of 2025 Applicant :- Praddum Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shashi Shankar Shukla,Vishvajeet Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. As informed by learned AGA, notice to the informant has been served on 3.1.2025 but none is present on behalf of the informant. 2. Supplementary affidavit filed today by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Shashi Shankar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ram Mohit Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material placed on record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 0441 of 2024, under Sections 87, 64(1) of BNS, Police Station - Maharajganj, District - Azamgarh, during the pendency of trial. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by about six days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has also stated that the victim is the consenting party as is evident from her statement recorded u/s 183 BNSS. The victim is major aged about 21 years old. It is also stated that criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant stands explained in the supplementary affidavit filed today in court. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.11.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant. 8. In the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648, the Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused by itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the delay of six days in lodging the FIR, the age of the victim and the statement of the victim recorded u/s 183 BNSS, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant- Praddum, 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 will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 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:- 30.4.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad