Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:86446 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15029 of 2025 Applicant :- Rinku Gautam Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- Alok Kumar Mishra,G.A.,Hari Om Pandey Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. As informed by learned State Law Officer, notice has been served to the informant on 6.5.2025. 3. Heard Sri Ashutosh Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Ms. Ifrah Islam, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. None is present on behalf of the informant. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 54 of 2025, U/S 351(2), 352, 64(1) B.N.S. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Rampur, District Jaunpur, during the pendency of trial. 5. The FIR was instituted regarding outraging of modesty of the sister of the informant on 24.3.2024. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. It is stated that he has nothing to do with the said offence. 7. Learned counsel has further argued that the allegations of outraging of modesty of the victim have been escalated to that of rape at the stage of recording of her statement u/s 183 B.N.S.S., that too, after legal consultation. 8. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 27.3.2025. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 9. Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application but has not disputed the fact that there is no criminal history of the applicant and the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the applicant. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and there being no medical corroboration of the incident, 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- Rinku Gautam involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. (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. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. 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 :- 22.5.2025 Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad