HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14878 of 2025 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1.List revised. None appears for the informant. Heard Sri Himashu Kumar and Sushil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The accused applicant is involved in Case Crime No.46 of 2025 under Section 64(1), 351(3) of B.N.S., Police Station Shahpur, District Muzaffar Nagar. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is the brother-in-law (Devar) of the victim. The victim's husband doing job at Saudi Arabia. He further submits that the incident is alleged to have taken place between 06.05.2020 to 20.02.2025, whereas the F.I.R., has been lodged on 27.02.2025 without there being any plausible explanation of such an inordinate delay. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of this Court to the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 of B.N.S.S, and argued that the victim has levelled allegation of committing maarpeet against her in-laws and so far as the applicant is concerned, she has levelled allegation of committing rape upon, whereas in her statement recorded under Section 183 of B.N.S.S., there is no whisper about commission of rape by the applicant. Learned counsel also argued that since the husband of the victim doing job at Saudia Arabia, therefore on petty issues she used to quarrel with her in-laws and has falsely implicated the applicant in the present case due to ulterior motive. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sushil Kumar Pandey, Tanisha Jahangir Monir Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Atul Kumar, G.A., Sunit Kumar, Yatish Kumar Dwivedi Shoeb .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 02.04.2025. 4. Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute the arguments advanced by learned Counsel for the applicants. 5. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence and without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed. 6. Let the applicant Sheob be released on bail in the aforementioned case crime number on executing a personal bond and furnishing two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions: i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court. v) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission. v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 7. In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the informant would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court. October 7, 2025 S.Ali BAIL No. 14878 of 2025 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad