HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29443 of 2025 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Sri Pankaj Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Syed Imran Ibrahim, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri Radhey Shyam, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record. 2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 317 of 2025 under Sections 140(2), 351(2) BNS, 3/4(2) POCSO Act and 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act, registered at Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Bulandshahar during pendency of the trial. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and he has been languishing in jail since 10.5.2025. It is further submitted that the victim has not supported the allegations before the learned trial court. It is also submitted that applicant has criminal history of one case which has been explained in the memo of application and he undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the fist informant and learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and it is submitted by them that the victim has supported the allegations made in the FIR in his statement recorded under section 183 BNSS. 5. FIR has been lodged by one Sunidhi, worker of NGO alleging that applicant had committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim who is 12 years old. The victim has supported the allegations made in the FIR in his statement recorded under section 183 BNSS, however, he has not supported the same in his testimony before the trial court and his medico-legal report also does not corroborate the aforesaid allegations. A pplicant has criminal history of one case which has been explained in the memo of Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajai Kumar, Pankaj Kumar Tiwari, Pushpendra Singh, Rukmani Ojha Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Syed Imran Ibrahim Puneet .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P Through Its Secretary Home U.P At Lucknow And Others .....Opposite Party(s) application and he is in jail since 10.5.2025. 6. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail. Hence, the present bail application is ALLOWED. 7. Let the applicant Puneet involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions :- (i) The applicant 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. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of B.N.S.S. (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 9. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order. May 7, 2026 Madhurima BAIL No. 29443 of 2025 2 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHURIMA GARG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad