Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:70902 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14903 of 2025 Applicant :- Shubham Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Bhuvnesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Bhuvnesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar, 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 17.04.2025. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.149 of 2025, under Sections 65(2), 115(2), 351(2) B.N.S., 5(ड)/6 POCSO Act and 3(2)5 S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Kotwali City, District Bijnor, during the pendency of trial. 5. As per prosecution story, the FIR was instituted against unknown person by the informant of having committed sexual assault with his minor daughter aged about 8 years. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is true that the FIR indicates mental depravity, but the applicant has nothing to do with it. The applicant is not named in the FIR and his name has not come up in the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 B.N.S.S., but as an afterthought subsequently his name has come up for the first time on the information of a squealer as recorded by the Investigating Officer and subsequently he entered in the case diary that it was the applicant who had committed the said offence. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the test identification parade was conducted in the jail premises as per the provisions of Section 7 of Bharitya Sakshya Adhiniyam on 18.03.2025 and the applicant was identified by the victim, but the said exercise is sham. It cannot be relied as already about 20 days before it, on 28.02.2025, the victim and the informant was shown the applicant in a vehicle being carried by the police and the said fact has been entered in the general diary and the case diary. 8. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgment of this Court passed in Asharfi vs. State, 1961 0 AIR(ALL) 153, whereby the adherence to the provisions of Evidence Act are to be undertaken by the Investigating Agency and the instant case is just misuse of process provided by law. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 28.02.2025 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 A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 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 fact that the applicant was not named in the FIR coupled with the fact that the test identification parade was taken on 18.03.2025 and the applicant was already shown by the police to the victim and also taking into consideration the judgment of this Court passed in Asharfi (Supra), 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- Shubham, 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. 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 :- 5.5.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad