Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:74488 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15525 of 2025 Applicant :- Kamalveer Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Giri,Jitendra Kumar Shishodia Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Jitendra Kumar Shishodia, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.11 of 2025, under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Civil Lines, District- Moradabad, during the pendency of trial. 5. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have taken the victim to his house on the pretext that he shall get her a job at school and had committed rape with her on 16.8.2023. 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 sixteen months and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the instant case is misuse of process of Court. Initially, the applicant was arrested in Case Crime No.598 of 2023, registered U/s 302, 307 I.P.C. at P.S. Majhola, District Moradabad and he was granted bail by this Court on 3.1.2025. The said order has been filed as Annexure-15 to the affidavit filed with bail application. 8. It is further argued that the police in connivance with the said informant is continuously implicating the applicant in several cases and subsequent to the said FIR No.598 of 2023, another recovery of pistol has been shown from the applicant and FIR No.818 of 2023 was registered in which he has been granted bail on 7.4.2025 and the said order has been filed with the supplementary affidavit filed today in Court. 9. In the same sequence, another FIR was got instituted by the informant as FIR No.861 of 2023 under the provisions of Section 3(1) UP Gangster and Anti-social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The applicant has filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by challenging the said FIR and the said writ petition is pending before this Court. Subsequent to it, the applicant was also prosecuted under the provisions of Section 3(2) National Security Act and the said proceedings have been quashed by this Court vide order dated 28.2.2024. 10. Learned counsel for the applicant has further contended that subsequently another case U/s 307, 504, 506 and 120-B I.P.C. has been instituted against the applicant which was entered as FIR No.181 of 2024 at P.S. Majhola, District Moradabad, which is a no injury case. The said case is just an effort of the informant of Case Crime No.598 of 2023 to keep the applicant behind the bar at one pretext or the other. The bail application in the said case is pending before this Court as it has been clubbed with the main accused person. In the aforesaid case, the applicant was booked while he was in jail of having hatched conspiracy in the said offence. As such, the criminal history assigned to the applicant stands explained. 11. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that there is no medical corroboration of the incident. The victim is major aged about 30 years. The applicant is languishing in jail since 27.1.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 12. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 13. The Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2020 (11) SCC 648 has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail, if otherwise his case of bail is made out. 14. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration that FIR is delayed by about sixteen months and there is no medical corroboration of the incident as also the circumstances of several FIRs instituted against the applicant when he was incarcerated in jail, 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. 15. Let the applicant- Kamalveer, 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. 16. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 17. 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 :- 8.5.2025 Vikas (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad