Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:87026 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12178 of 2025 Applicant :- Ajay Alias Tota Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Birendra Kumar Mishra,Byas Kumar Prasad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Prashant Vardhan Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 3. As informed by learned A.G.A., notice has been served to the informant on 16.4.2025. 4. Heard Sri Byas Kumar Prasad, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. None is present on behalf of the informant. 5. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 736 of 2024, U/S 137(2), 87, 64 B.N.S., 2023 and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Shikohabad, District Firozabad, during the pendency of trial. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. It is stated that he has nothing to do with the said offence. FIR is delayed by three days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 7. Learned counsel has further argued that the victim is the consenting party, as is evident from the fact that she had travelled with the applicant all the way to Delhi and thereupon had gone to Mumbai and was retrieved by the police from there. The victim did not raise any alarm during the said sojourn. 8. Learned counsel has further submitted that the victim seems to be major, although as per ossification test report, she is 17 years old, as such, a leverage of two years may be granted to the applicant on the upper side. 9. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 16.12.2024. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 10. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but has not disputed the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the applicant. 11. 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. 12. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, 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. 13. Let the applicant- Ajay Alias Tota involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. (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. 14. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. 15. 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 :- 22.5.2025\Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad