HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44530 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. None appeared on behalf of the informant even in the revised call. 2. Heard Sri Manvendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Manoj Kumar Sinigh, learned Brief Holder, learned AGA, for the State. 3. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.101 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 351(3), 305A, 69 and 65(2) BNS, Section 3(2)(V) SC/ST Act and Section 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Kareli, District Prayagraj during pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and on the basis of false allegation he has been made accused in the present matter. 5. He further argued that admittedly informant of the case was major and married lady and she though made allegation of sexual harassment against the applicant in the FIR but when her statements were recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS then she twisted the facts of the case and also started making allegation that applicant also used to sexually harass her minor daughter aged about nine years. 6. He next submits that prima facie allegations levelled against the applicant are highly improbable. 7. He further submits that actually applicant and informant were in Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manvendra Narain Pathak, Rajeev Kumar Tiwari, Sanjay Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Jyoti Kushwaha, Pramod Kumar Pandey Rambali Pal Alias Raju Pal .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) relationship but subsequently some dispute arose between both of them and thereafter informant lodged FIR of the present case. 8. He further argued that after FIR informant developed new story and in her both the statements also started making allegation of sexual harassment of her daughter. He next submits that even the statements of the informant prima facie appear to be improbable. 9. He further argued that apart from the present case applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 28.6.2025, i.e., for the last more than eight months. 10. Per contra, learned AGA, although opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 12. However, there is allegation that applicant under false promise of marriage sexually exploited the informant and he also made sexual assault upon her minor daughter aged about nine years but allegation of sexual assault by applicant upon minor daughter of the informant has not been made by informant in the FIR and considering this fact the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant that subsequently informant developed new story cannot be ruled out at this stage. 13. Further, however, it reflects that even daughter of the informant in her statement recorded during investigation stated against the applicant but she is tender age girl and, therefore, at this stage possibility cannot be ruled out that she under the instigation of her mother, i..e, informant started making allegation against the applicant. 14. Further, admittedly informant is major and married lady and from the entire material available on record she appears to be consenting party and considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, reason of false implication of the applicant disclosed by learned counsel for the applicant cannot be ruled out at this stage. 15. Further, applicant is not having any previous criminal history to his credit and in the present matter he is in jail since 28.6.2025, i.e., for the BAIL No. 44530 of 2025 2 last more than eight months. 16. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 17. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 18. Let the applicant-Rambali Pal alias Raju Pal be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 19. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 20. 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. March 18, 2026 SKM BAIL No. 44530 of 2025 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad