Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:80169 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10893 of 2025 Applicant :- Fizu Urf Fizuddin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Kumar Dhananjay Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anil Kumar Ojha,G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Kumar Dhananjay, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Urvesh Kumar, holding brief of Sri Anil Kumar Ojha, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Rajendra Pratap Singh, learned State Law Officer and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No./FIR No. 0069 of 2025 , under Sections 64(2), 351(2) of BNS and Sections 3/4(2) of POCSO Act, Police Station Loni, District Ghaziabad, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the FIR was instituted by the informant stating that she has been sexually exploited by the applicant for more than one year as the applicant had taken control of her by using the powers of exorcism, as such the victim had video recorded the said act and given it to the Investigating Officer and instituted the FIR. 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 allegations are per se false. 6. Learned counsel has also stated that there is no evidence that the applicant was involved in exorcism. The victim is major and her husband had deserted her. The victim has subsequently escalated the allegations that the applicant had outraged the modesty of her daughter also and also attempted to commit rape with her in her statement recorded under section 183 BNSS and the said allegations have been made after legal consultation. 7. The criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant has been explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 06.02.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Per contra, learned State Law Officer and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant. 9. In the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648, the Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused by itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the statement of the victim recorded under section 183 BNSS coupled by the fact that the victim is major, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant- Fizu Urf Fizuddin , 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 the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 13. 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 :- 15.5.2025 Sumit S (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad