Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:90703 Court No. - 68 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9079 of 2025 Applicant :- Sonu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rishabh Agarwal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Sri Rishabh Agarwal, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Yagyavalk Pandey, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record. 2. This bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant, Sonu, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 19 of 2025, under Sections 74, 109 (1), 351 (2), 115 (2) BNS and Section 9/10 POCSO Act, Police Station Kheragarh, District Firozabad. 3. The allegation made in the FIR is that on 09.02.2025 at about 8:30 p.m. applicant came to the house of the first informant asking for food and when the wife of the informant refused to give the same, he took his daughter to a nearby temple and tried to outrage her modesty.. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused- applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this case crime number and is languishing in jail since 13.02.2025. He has no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the incident took place in an Aabadi area and the investigating officer has not recorded the statement of any independent witness and non present of the statement of any independent witness clearly establishes the falsity of the instant prosecution. There are various contradiction in the statements of witnesses and prosecutrix recorded under sections 180 and 183 BNSS as well as the FIR version. The medical examination of the victim has been denied by the first informant. The investigating officer after completing investigation has submitted charge sheet against the applicant on 16.02.2025. The alleged entire prosecution story against the applicant is false, fabricated, baseless and concocted. Hence, bail has been prayed for. 5. Learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts. 6. Considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the accused-applicant, Sonu, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions: i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence. ii. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity. iii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial. iv. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned. 9. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail. Order Date :- 26.5.2025 v.k.updh. Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad