HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1981 of 2025 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J. 1. Heard Mr. Ram Raj Pandey and Mr. Pavanesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Rewti Raman Patel, learned counsel for the informant/respondent no.2 and learned AGA as well as perused the entire record. 2. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant- Mohit Joshi to set-aside the bail rejection order dated 28.01.2025 passed by Special Judge SC/ST Act, in Bail Application No.558 of 2025 (Mohit Joshi Vs. State of U.P.), arising out of Case Crime No. 157 of 2024, under Sections 376, 328, 506 IPC, Section 3 (2) (V) SC/ST Act and Section 66 I.T. Act, Police Station- Khurja Nagar, District- Bulandshahar with a further prayer to release the appellant on bail in the aforesaid case. 3. As per prosecution story, the victim herself lodged the impugned FIR against the appellant alleging therein that the victim met the appellant on Instagram in the year 2023 and she fell in love with the appellant. It is further alleged that on the false promise of marriage, the appellant established physical relation with her. It is also alleged that the 28.8.2023, the appellant called the victim and victim went with the appellant to Bulandsahar where they both went to Amit Hotel where appellant give her intoxicated cold drink due to which she become unconscious and appellant committed rape upon her and made her nude videos and also threatened her to viral the same on Instagram and continue established physical relation with her. It is also alleged that the appellant snatched the mobile to the Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Bipin Kumar, Pavanesh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Rewti Raman Patel Mohit Joshi .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) victim and viral the same. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the FIR is delayed about 7 months and there is no explanation for the said delay. He further submits that the appellant has not committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. The victim herself has refused her medical examination. It is admitted that the victim is well known to the appellant and she fell in love and she herself went with the appellant. He further submits that the victim is a consenting party and appellant has never viral any photos/video and as such, no offence under Section 376 IPC and Section 66 I.T. Act, is made out against the appellant. He further submits that the appellant is also ready to solemnized marriage with the victim. There are major contradictions in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 & 164 Cr.P.C.. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. Appellant is languishing in jail since 3.4.2024 having no criminal history. 5. Upon quiery made to learned A.G.A., whether any nude photos/video has been viral by the appellant or not, learned A.G.A. submits that the no such photos/videos has been collected by the Investigating Officer. 6. Learned counsel for the informant/respondent no.2 as well as A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the submission of learned counsel for the appellant. 7. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned order carefully. 8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, role assigned to the present appellant as well as victim is a consenting party, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The Court below erred in rejecting the bail application of the appellant. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to CRLA No. 1981 of 2025 2 be set-aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed. 9. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is hereby set-aside. 10. Let the appellant- Mohit Joshi, involved in aforesaid case crime number be released on bail on 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 appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (v) The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. September 10, 2025 Krishna* CRLA No. 1981 of 2025 3 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad