Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:65940 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12039 of 2025 Applicant :- Shani Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Geetam Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Gajendra Singh Chauhan,Vivek Singh Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Geetam Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Learned A.G.A. has informed that the notice to the informant has been served on 08.04.2025. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.476 of 2024 (S.T. No.1004 of 2024, State vs. Shani and Others), under Sections 137(2), 87, 70(2) B.N.S. and Section 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Soron, District Kasganj, during the pendency of trial. 5. As per prosecution story, the applicant and two other co-accused persons are stated to have abducted the victim and had taken her to a secluded placed and outraged her modesty on 03.10.2024 at about 11:30 p.m. 6. 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 one day and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The allegations of outraging the modesty were made in the FIR only, but subsequently the same have been escalated to that of rape by her after legal consultation. There is no medical corroboration of the allegation of rape. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the victim has stated that the applicant had raped her and the co- accused persons had caught hold her hands, but the said allegations do not stand substantiated by any medical evidence whatsoever. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 11.10.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the fact that the victim has changed the version of outraging the modesty to that of rape in her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S. and there being no medical corroboration of the incident coupled with the fact that the FIR is delayed by about one day and there is no explanation of the said delay caused, 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- Shani, 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 :- 29.4.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad