Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:34421 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6079 of 2025 Applicant :- Ravi Alias Hukam Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Tiwari,Pradeep Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajesh Kumar Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Pradeep Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the informant, Ms. Ifrah Islam, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.446 of 2024, under Sections 65(1), 351(3) B.N.S. and 4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station Trans Yamuna, District Agra, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have fleeced and fooled the informant and had committed rape with her minor daughter, aged about 15 years, and clicked certain indecent photographs of her and kept on establishing corporeal relationship with her on the pretext that he shall make the said photographs viral on social media. 5. The informant is stated to have left the house of the applicant and started living elsewhere, whereby the applicant continued the said offence. Peeved by the said act, the instant FIR was instituted by her mother. 6. 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 more than one month and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The victim by her looks seems to be major, although as per ossification test report, her age has come out to be 16 years and a leverage of two years may be granted to the applicant on the upper side. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. There is no recovery of any indecent photographs of the victim from the applicant or from anyone else whatsoever. 7. 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 01.11.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Learned counsel for the informant and learned State Law Officer have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the victim was minor, aged about 14 years, as per her class VIIIth school certificate. 9. 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. 10. 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. 11. Let the applicant- Ravi Alias Hukam Singh, 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. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 13. 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 :- 10.3.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad