HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31427 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party. 2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 183 of 2025, under Sections 352, 74, 351(3), 115(2), 76, 77, 78, 140(3), 296, 111(3) B.N.S., Police Station Ubhaon, District Ballia during the pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 30.06.2025. The victim was recovered at 02.00 p.m. on the same day. The first information report was lodged on 01.07.2025 at 03.47 p.m. The delay is fatal to the prosecution case. The victim was not abducted by the applicant. As per the medical report, the victim has not sustained any injury. There are contradictions in the statements of the victim under Sections 180 and 183 B.N.S.S. The said contradictions discredit the prosecution case. No indecent photograph/ video was recovered by the Investigating Officer. It is next contended that the applicant is not a member of any organized crime syndicate nor he acted on behalf of such syndicate. The applicant is in jail since 05.07.2025 having no criminal history and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Krishna Mohan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Vipin Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) record, this Court prima facie finds that as per the medical report, the victim has not sustained any injury. There are contradictions in the statements of the victim under Sections 180 and 183 B.N.S.S.. No indecent photograph/ video was recovered by the Investigating Officer. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for more than three months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, and no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant- Vipin Yadav, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that he: (i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and, (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. October 13, 2025 SKT/- BAIL No. 31427 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad