Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:56683 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10598 of 2025 Applicant :- Sakib Alias Raghu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ankur Tyagi,Pankaj Bharti Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. As informed by learned State Law Officer, notice to the informant has been served on 2.4.2025 but none is present on behalf of the informant. 2. Heard Sri Pankaj Bharti, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Jai Kishan Chaurasia, learned State Law Officer and also perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 116 of 2025, under Sections 333, 115(2), 64(2), 351(2) of BNS and Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Nai Mandi, District - Muzaffar Nagar, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have outraged the modesty of the victim on 07.03.2025 at about 06:00 PM. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by about two days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has also stated that the victim has plainly refused to get her internal medical examination. The allegations of outraging her modesty have been escalated to that of attempt to rape in her statement recorded u/s 180 BNSS and she has been further escalated the allegations to that of rape in her statement recorded u/s 183 BNSS. The said allegations have been inflated after due deliberations and legal consultations. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 11.03.2025 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. Per contra, learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history. 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- Sakib Alias Raghu, 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 will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 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:- 17.4.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad