Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:51289 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8299 of 2025 Applicant :- Raj Kumar Jain Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Singh Tomar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shailesh Kumar Srivastava Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Court today is taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Rahul Singh Tomar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Aman Srivastava holding brief of Sri Shailesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant as well as Ms. Ifra Islam, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 441 of 2024, under Sections 64, 78, 351(2), 352 B.N.S., Police Station Khekada, District Baghpat, during the pendency of trial. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The allegations are per se false. The victim is already a married lady and the applicant is also a married person. A matter of consensual illicit relationship has been converted to a criminal case by her. The FIR is delayed by about 72 days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. It has been further argued that the criminal history of two cases has been explained in the affidavit. The applicant is languishing in jail since 05.01.2025 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. Learned counsel for the informant and learned State Law Officer have vehemently opposed the bail application. 8. 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. 9. Let the applicant- Raj Kumar Jain, 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 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. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 11. 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 Priya (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- PRIYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad