Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:89438 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14645 of 2025 Applicant :- Manjeet Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Bhupendra Pandey,Lakshman Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- Arvind Kumar Yadav,G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Lakshman Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arvind Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the informant, Ms. Ifrah Islam, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.11 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 126(2), 352, 351(3), 115(2), 70(2) B.N.S. and 5G/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Narhi, District Ballia, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have outraged the modesty of the minor daughter of the informant aged about 15 years on 05.01.2025 at about 5:00 p.m., while the co-accused persons, namely, Sintoo Yadav @ Sandesh Yadav and Golu Yadav, are stated to have hurled abuses at her and threatened her and thereafter all the accused persons are stated to have run away from the place of occurrence. 5. 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 about one day and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. As per ossification test report, the victim was less than 18 years old and a leverage of two years may be granted to the applicant on the upper side. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has also argued that initially the allegations against the applicant were of outraging the modesty only, but the same have been escalated to that of gang-rape by the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S. after legal consultation. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the victim has not whispered a single word about rape in her statement recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S., as such, it is a clear-cut case of false implication. It is true that the victim has sustained certain minor injuries on her body, but a case of physical assault has been converted to that of sexual assault by the victim in collusion with the informant. 8. Learned counsel for the applicant has also argued that there is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 08.01.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 9. Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the victim was disrobed by the applicant and her modesty was outraged, although she has denied being sexually assaulted by the applicant in answer to the question put by the Investigating Officer, although they could not dispute the fact that the medical report does not corroborate the allegations of rape. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the delay in institution of the FIR and there being no medical corroboration of the incident as far as the allegation of rape is concerned, 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. 11. Let the applicant- Manjeet Yadav, 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 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. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 13. 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 :- 26.5.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad