Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:86810 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8608 of 2025 Applicant :- Shivam Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Ranjeet Singh and Sri Yogendra Gupta, learned counsels for the applicant and Sri Harsh Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 142 of 2024, under Sections 64, 115(2), 351(2), 332(b) of BNS, Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act and Section 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act, Police Station - Mataundh, District - Banda, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have committed rape with the victim on 25.09.2024 at about 01:00 PM by barging into her house and had subsequently beaten her brother. 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 as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by about 10 hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has also stated that the medical report does not corroborate the allegations of rape rather the victim has sustained injuries which are simple in nature. A case of physical brawl has been converted into that of rape. As per high school certificate, the age of the victim is 17 years 02 months and 07 days on the date of incident. The applicant himself is a young boy aged about 24 years. 7. Learned counsel has next contended that criminal history assigned to the applicant stands explained as the said offence is bailable and he has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 29.05.2024. The applicant is languishing in jail since 27.09.2024 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. Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant. 9. In the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648, the Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused by itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, delay in lodging the FIR and also considering the medical report of the victim which does not corroborate the allegation of rape, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant- Shivam 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 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. 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:- 22.5.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad