HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7080 of 2025 Court No. - 17 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Sri Atul Verma, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Uttam Kumar Gond, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the records. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 753 of 2024, under Sections 376-D/506 I.P.C. and Section 5/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and Section 67-B of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2000, registered at Police Station Kotwali City, District Hardoi. The first Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.1802 of 2025 was rejected by this court by means of an order dated 08.05.2025. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of F.I.R. lodged on 16.11.2024, stating that the informant aged 23 years old came into contact with the applicant in the year 2017. In the year 2019, he made physical relations against her consent and videographed the incident. This video was shown to the informant by three other persons named Ahmad, Arsul and Kittu. 4. In the statement of the victim/informant recorded under Sections 180 B.N.S.S and 183 B.N.S.S, she reiterated the F.I.R version. 5. The medico legal examination report of the victim/informant reveals no mark of injury or sign of use of force but it was reported that hymen was not present. 6. The first application was rejected after taking into consideration the submissions of the learned A.G.A. that it is recorded in the case diary that the applicant had prepared obscene video of the victim and saved the same in g- mail account from his phone. This video was found in the mobile phones of Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Atul Verma, Akhilendra Pratap Singh, Vinod Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Mahesh Kumar Ajmat Ilahi .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) three other accused persons. The victim had stated that this incident had taken place in the year 2019. 7. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that in the affidavit filed in support of the second bail application it has categorically been stated that the applicant's mobile phone which has been seized by the Investigating Officer on 17.11.2024 had been purchased on 27.09.2021 and the receipt for purchase of the mobile phone has been annexed as Annexure No.10 of the affidavit. The model of the mobile phone was launched on 14.07.2021 and this model was not available prior thereto particularly in the year 2019 when the incident is alleged to have taken place. His submission is that in case the prosecution version is accepted the incident took place after 27.09.2021 on which date the victim was major and the allegation of commission of offence under POCSO Act would stand belied from the prosecution case itself. 8. It has also been stated in the affidavit that although it is alleged that the video has been uploaded on the g-mail account no investigation has been conducted on this point and the investigation already stands concluded and a charge sheet has been submitted. 9. The State has filed a detailed counter affidavit but no specific reply has been given to the aforesaid pleas taken in the affidavit in support of the application. It has further been stated in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application that upon coming to know about the video having been spread virally the applicant himself had made a complaint to the Cyber Cell on 12.09.2024 stating that a video of his along with his girlfriend was being circulated and the caller was demanding five lakh rupees from him for deleting the video. The victim had also made a complaint in this regard. 10. The counter affidavit does not contain any specific reply to the aforesaid averments and there is no allegation of any action taken on the complaint of the applicant. 11. As the State has failed to rebut the aforesaid specific averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the application, I am of the view that aforesaid undisputed submissions make out a case for grant of bail to the applicant. 12. Accordingly, the second bail application stands allowed. 13. Let the applicant-Ajmat Ilahi 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 magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; BAIL No. 7080 of 2025 2 (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court. October 14, 2025 Ram. BAIL No. 7080 of 2025 3 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench