Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:52740 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8851 of 2025 Applicant :- Rohit Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Satyendra Narayan Singh,Vikram Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pradeep Kumar,Vinkesh Ojha Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Satyendra Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel for the informant, Ms. Sabista Parveen, learned counsel for the Child Welfare Committee, Sri R.P. Singh, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.330 of 2024, under Sections 65(2) B.N.S., 2023, Section 5/6 POCSO Act and Section 3(2)V SC/ST Act, Police Station Girwan, District Banda, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have committed aggravated sexual assault with the victim, aged about 5 years, on 09.11.2024 at about 4:00 p.m. on the pretext of giving her a chocolate. 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 2 days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. Even the informant has refused her internal medical examination, which indicates that it is a clear-cut case of false implication. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that in another matter, a person belonging to the family of the informant had died and the FIR was instituted against the applicant for Rash and Negligent Act and accident and the applicant was exonerated in it. The said FIR No.31 of 2023 has been annexed as annexure No.9 to the affidavit filed with the bail application. There is no previous criminal history of the applicant except the said case, in which closure report has been filed. The applicant is languishing in jail since 12.11.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Learned A.G.A., learned counsel for the informant and learned counsel for the Child Welfare Committee have vehemently opposed the bail application. 8. The Supreme Court in the case of Niranjan Singh and another vs. Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote and Others, AIR 1980 SC 785 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- Rohit 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 :- 10.4.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad