Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:51918 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7279 of 2025 Applicant :- Faizaan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Kant Yadav,Pramod Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Indradeep Dubey,Kuldeep Mishra Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed today by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Pramod Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Kuldeep Mishra, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 161 of 2024, under Section 376(2)(n) of IPC, 351(3), 89 of BNS and Sections 3/5 of U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, Police Station - Kadadham, District - Kaushambi, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have established corporeal relationship with the victim on the false promise of marriage and also used powers of exorcism on her. He is also stated to have subsequently refused to comply with the said promise of marriage on the ground that he belongs to different religion. The applicant is even stated to have forcibly terminated the pregnancy of the victim after she was impregnated by the said corporeal relationship. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. The FIR is delayed by about two months and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. It is a matter of consensual relationship between the two. The victim is major aged about 20 years. There is no clinching evidence to suggest that the applicant misled the victim from the beginning. The informant has converted a failed consensual physical relationship into a criminal case. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 12.08.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the statement of the father of the victim has already been recorded in court and he has deposed against the applicant. However, the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant has not been disputed by them and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history. 7. The Supreme Court in Pramod Suryabhan Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra and Another, 2019 (9) SCC 608 and Ansaar Mohammad vs. State of Rajasthan and Another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 886, has stated that entering into any kind of corporeal relationship with a person on the false promise to marry cannot be termed as rape. 8. This Court has avoided expressing its opinion as the case hinges on whether the applicant's promise of marriage was genuine or false and whether the physical relationship was consensual or not. It is for the Trial Court to draw a conclusion which will depend on the evidence presented before it and its interpretation as per law. 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- Faizaan, 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 will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 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:- 9.4.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad