Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:80973 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16705 of 2025 Applicant :- Ashok Yadav @ Raju Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mahadeo Singh Chandel Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Pranshu Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 698 of 2024, U/S 64, 308(5) B.N.S. and 67 I.T. Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Banda, during the pendency of trial. PROSECUTION STORY: 4. When the victim was taking bath, the applicant is stated to have clicked her photos and had video-recorded the said act and had threatened her to make them viral on social media and had established corporeal relationship with her. 5. The applicant is stated to have even taken Rs. 35,000/- from her in lieu of deleting the said video and photographs and subsequently demanded an extortion money of Rs. 5 lakhs from her. The applicant is stated to have sent the said indecent video and photographs to her husband on 17.8.2024 on her refusal to give him the said extortion money. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT: 6. 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. He has nothing to do with the said offence. 7. The FIR is delayed by twelve days from the said incident of sending the indecent video and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 8. The said video, if any, has been given to the investigating officer by the informant but there is nothing on record to suggest as to how the said video was received by her. There is no mobile number of the husband of the victim or of the applicant mentioned in the FIR or taken into account by the investigating officer, as such, it is a clear- cut case of false implication. The investigating officer did not even care to record the statement of the husband of the victim. There is no proof of applicant having taken extortion money from the victim having given Rs. 35,000/- to the applicant. 9. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 11.10.2024. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF INFORMANT/STATE: 10. The bail application has been opposed but the fact that there is no criminal history of the applicant has not been disputed. CONCLUSION: 11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, the delay in institution of FIR, there being no medical corroboration of the incident and there being no proof of applicant having taken extortion money from the victim, 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. 12. Let the applicant- Ashok Yadav @ Raju 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. 13. 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. 14. 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 Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad