Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:112340 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40710 of 2023 Applicant :- Naresh @ Yuvi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Jay Prakash Yadav,Preyansh Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. As informed by learned A.G.A., notice to the informant has been served on 14.09.2023, but none is present on behalf of the informant even in the revised call. 2. Heard Sri Jai Prakash Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ram Mohit Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 692 of 2021, under Sections 363, 376 IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Kaushambi, District Ghaziabad, during the pendency of trial. 4. 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. 5. Learned counsel has further stated that the victim is a consenting party as is but evident from her statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. and also from the fact that she had taken away certain ornaments and cash from her house at the time of her elopement. There is no medical corroboration of the incident as the victim has refused her medical examination. As per ossification test report, age of the victim has come up to be 18 years. 6. Learned counsel has further stated that the applicant is a indigent person as he could not engage an advocate of his choice. It is next stated that five witnesses were examined during trial and the cross-examination of all the witnesses was closed. After appointing an Amicus Curiae, cross-examination of PW-1 has only been completed as the witnesses were recalled on an application moved by the Amicus Curiae. 7. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 08.10.2021, as such his Fundamental Rights enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India stand violated. There is no likelihood of early conclusion of trial in near future as per report of the trial court dated 03.06.2024 also. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the period of incarceration as well as the statement of the victim recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. and the circumstances as enumerated before, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant- Naresh @ Yuvi, 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 the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall 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 :- 14.7.2025 Sumit S (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad