HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32893 of 2025 Court No. - 65 (Sl. No. 97 out of 259) HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Praveen Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ramesh Chandra Agrahari, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri J.K. Chaurasia, learned State Law Officer and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 0234 of 2025, under Sections 351(2) and 76 of BNS, Police Station Soram, Ganganagar Commissionerate, Prayagraj, District Prayagraj, during the pendency of trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR was instituted regarding criminal intimidation and disrobing the victim but the said allegations have been escalated to that of rape u/s 183 BNSS. The said statement has been recorded as an afterthought. It is also alleged that applicant is stated to have video-recorded the said act and had sent the said video to the erstwhile husband but there is nothing on record to suggest that there is recovery of any video, whatsoever. Even otherwise, the FIR is delayed by about 20 days. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that there is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 2.8.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajai Kumar Srivastava, Praveen Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ramesh Chandra Agrahari, G.A. Vishal Pasi .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Learned State Law Officer and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute the submissions made by the counsel for the applicant. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the delay in FIR; there being nothing on record to suggest that there is recovery of any video 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. 8. Let the applicant- Vishal Pasi, 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 verification of sureties, with the condition that he shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as required. 9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 10. 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. May 6, 2026 Shalini BAIL No. 32893 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad