Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:63522 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13692 of 2025 Applicant :- Prakash Soni Alias Nikhil Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Kumar,Pankaj Kumar Mishra,Saurabh Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. 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. Heard Sri Vineet Kumar Verma, Advocate holding brief of Sri Pankaj Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.42 of 2025, under Section 376-D I.P.C., Police Station- Crossing Republic, District- Ghaziabad, during the pendency of trial. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is not named in the FIR and his name has come up later on in the statement of the victim recorded U/s 180 & 183 B.N.S.S. The applicant is a married lady aged about 24 years, as such, she was major at the time of incident. The applicant has been implicated subsequently in the said statement stating that applicant and co-accused person Narendra had gang-raped her in the year 2020. No date and time of said offence is mentioned. 6. learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that it is a clear cut case of false implication. The victim has instituted two more FIRs against the same accused, i.e. Case Crime No.922 of 2024, U/s 75 B.N.S., Police Station Vijay Nagar, District Ghaziabad & Case Crime No.1011 of 2024, U/s 75 B.N.S, Police Station Industrial Area, District Ghaziabad. The FIRs have been instituted at different police stations just to keep the co-accused persons and applicant behind the bar. The applicant has applied for bail in all the cases. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has also argued that there is no medical corroboration of the incident. The statement of the victim has been recorded after a delay of five years to the incident. The applicant is languishing in jail since 24.3.2025 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. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 9. The Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2020 (11) SCC 648 has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail, if otherwise his case of bail is made out. 10. In light of the judgement of the Supreme Court passed in Niranjan Singh and another vs Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote and others AIR 1980 SC 785, this Court has avoided detailed examination of the evidence and elaborate documentation of the merits of the case as no party should have the impression that his case has been prejudiced. A prima facie satisfaction of case is needed but it is not the same as an exhaustive exploration of the merits in the order itself. 11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration that victim has instituted three FIRs at different police station regarding similar allegation coupled by the fact that name of the applicant has come up in the statement of victim U/s 180 & 183 B.N.S.S. that too after a delay of about five years and 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. 12. Let the applicant- Prakash Soni Alias Nikhil, 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. 13. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 14. 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 :- 25.4.2025 Vikas (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad