Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:70039 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13565 of 2025 Applicant :- Yogendra Singh Alias Raju Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Brijesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned State Law Officer and also perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 301 of 2024, under Sections 64, 351(2), 351(3) of BNS, Police Station - Maharajpur, District - Kanpur Nagar, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have committed rape with the victim and video recorded the said act. He is stated to have continued to kept on establishing corporeal relationship with her by threatening her to make her indecent video viral on social media. 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. Learned counsel has also stated that the victim is major aged about 24 years. There is no recovery of any video whatsoever by the Investigating Officer. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. 6. Learned counsel has further stated that criminal history of four cases assigned to the applicant has been explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 09.08.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 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. 8. 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. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the age of the victim and the fact that there is no recovery of any video whatsoever coupled by the fact that there is no medical corroboration of the incident, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant- Yogendra Singh Alias Raju, 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. 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:- 2.5.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad