Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:81075 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16691 of 2025 Applicant :- Ravesh Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Somit Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Learned A.G.A. has informed that notice to the informant has been served on 6.5.2025. 3. Heard Sri Siddharth Shukla and Sri Somit Shukla, learned counsels for the applicant, Sri Pranshu Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.26 of 2025, under Sections 70(2), 137(2), 123 B.N.S. and 5G/6 POCSO Act, Police Station- Shahzad Nagar, District- Rampur, during the pendency of trial. 5. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have called the victim and taken her in his Tata Safari car, bearing no.UP21 BK 8270 and had spiked her drink and committed rape with her alongwith his two unknown friends. The informant is stated to have called the victim who informed her about the incident. 6. 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. The FIR is delayed by about three days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that there is no medical corroboration of the incident. Although, the medical examination of the victim was conducted four days after the incident. There is no sign of any struggle whatsoever. Learned counsel has stated that the allegations have been falsely made by the victim as the applicant had given Rs.2 lakh to her mother/informant, as such, it is a clear cut case of false implication. 8. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 8.3.2025 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 on the ground that victim was 13 years old only, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 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 of three days in institution of FIR coupled by the fact that there is no medical corroboration of the incident, 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- Ravesh 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 pressurize/intimidate 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 :- 16.5.2025 Vikas (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad