Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:65102 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13801 of 2025 Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Garun Pal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Garun Pal Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V.S. Sishodia, learned counsel for the informant, Ms. R.U. Rinki Renu, learned counsel for the High Court Legal Service Committee, Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, 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 11.04.2025. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.228 of 2024, under Sections 452, 323, 336, 376(3), 354, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station Sikandrarau, District Hathras, during the pendency of trial. 5. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have assaulted and caused injuries to the victim and had outraged her modesty on 02.04.2024 at about 1:00 a.m. by barging into her house. 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 more than 14 hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The FIR was instituted regarding outraging the modesty and assaulting the victim, but the said allegations have been escalated to that of rape in her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S. that too after legal consultation. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the allegations of rape do not find any corroboration from medical evidence. It is true that the victim has sustained injuries of nail marks on her chest and one abrasion has been observed on her right wrist, but the said injuries cannot be assigned regarding the offence of sexual assault. The FSL report indicates that spermatozoa was found in the vaginal slide, but the same cannot be assigned to the applicant as the FIR was silent about the allegations of rape. 8. Learned counsel for the applicant has also stated that the age of the victim is between 15-16 years as per ossification test report. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 28.11.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 9. Learned counsel for the informant, learned counsel for the High Court Legal Service Committee and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the victim out of shame could not institute the FIR of rape. 10. Learned counsel for the informant has further stated that the FSL report indicates that spermatozoa was observed on the vaginal smear of the victim, as such, the allegations of rape stand fortified. 11. 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 FIR did not mention a single word about the sexual assault, rather it mentioned about the physical assault coupled with outraging the modesty and also taking into consideration the fact that there is no injury observed on the body of the victim regarding sexual assault, 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- Ajay Kumar, 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 :- 28.4.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad