Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:36569 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6571 of 2025 Applicant :- Matloob Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Singh Parmar,Virendra Singh Parmar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Prashant Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Virendra Singh Parmar, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Arun Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.253 of 2024, under Sections 70(1), 127(2), 352, 351(2), 115 B.N.S. and 3/5(1) of UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, Police Station- Binwar, District- Hamirpur, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have impersonated himself to be of the religion of the informant and had concealed his religion. The applicant is stated to have befriended the victim on Facebook and had called her to his house on 25.7.2024 on the false promise of marriage and had even tried to force her to embrace Islam. The victim is stated to have been raped in the night of 25/26.7.2024. Next day, the victim is stated to have returned to her house and the FIR was instituted against the applicant subsequently. 5. 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 about two months and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. The victim is major aged about 25 years. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the instant FIR is counterblast to an application moved by the father of the applicant against Jubair Khan, Junaid Khan and two unknown persons. The CDRs of the mobile of the victim and the said accused Junaid Khan were found at the same place at Chhatarpur, Madhya Pradesh on 25.7.2024 which indicates that the instant FIR has been instituted at the behest of said accused Jubair Khan and Junaid Khan against whom the father of the applicant had moved an application on 5.10.2024. The said application has been filed as Annexure No.1 to the affidavit filed with bail application. 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 antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 19.10.2024 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 A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 9. In light of the judgement of the Supreme Court passed in Niranjan Singh and another vs Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote and others AIR 1980 SC 785, this Court 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- Matloob Khan, 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 :- 12.3.2025 Vikas (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad