Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:78979 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15309 of 2025 Applicant :- Anuj Alias Sani Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shiva Kant Dubey,Surya Prakash Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. As informed by learned AGA, notice to the informant has been served on 03.05.2025 but none is present on behalf of the informant. 2. Heard Sri Shiva Kant Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 379 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) of BNS and Sections 3/4(2) of POCSO Act, Police Station - Kurara, District - Hamirpur, 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. The FIR is delayed by about two days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 5. Learned counsel has also stated that the victim is the consenting party as is evident from the fact that she had gone with the applicant all the way to Gujarat and stayed with him. It is argued that the victim has not raised any alarm whatsoever during the said sojourn. The victim is 19 years old as per her own statement recorded u/s 183 BNSS. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 04.01.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. 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. 7. In the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648, the Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused by itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, delay in lodging the FIR, the age of the victim and also considering the statement of the victim recorded u/s 183 BNSS wherein she seems to be a consenting party, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant- Anuj Alias Sani, 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 will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 11. 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:- 14.5.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad