Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:36445 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7090 of 2025 Applicant :- Ajay Singh Chauhan Alias Nagendra Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Devendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Dheeraj Kumar Maurya,G.A.,Narendra Kumar Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Devendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Narendra Kumar, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Shyam Dhar Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.05 of 2025, under Sections 75(2), 64 B.N.S. and 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station- Asothar, District- Fatehpur, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have called the victim on the roof and had outraged her modesty and committed indecent acts with her and was seen by her father on being woken up by her mother on 13.1.2025 at about 10:00 p.m. 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 thirteen hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The victim is a consenting party as is but evident from the circumstances as narrated in the FIR as she had gone to the roof on being called by the applicant. The FIR does not mention a single word about sexual assault. It only mentions about outraging her modesty only. The said allegations of rape have been subsequently raised by the victim in her statement recorded U/s 183 B.N.S.S. that too after legal consultation. The victim by her looks seems to be major, although she is stated to be less than 17 years of age as per her school certificate. 6. 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 23.1.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application and stated that it is common for the villagers to sleep on the roof even in the winter season. 8. 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. 9. 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. 10. Let the applicant- Ajay Singh Chauhan Alias Nagendra Singh, 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. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 12. 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