Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:93264 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16165 of 2025 Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Saurabh Pandey,Suresh Chandra Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Saurabh Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Deepak Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.162 of 2025, under Section 64(1) B.N.S., Police Station Sikandara, District Agra, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have met the victim in jail and had forced her to stay in a hotel at Agra, whereby he is stated to have committed rape with her on 15.03.2025. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no time of offence mentioned in the FIR. It itself is delayed by about three days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The victim is a married lady, obviously she is major. She has stated herself to be 26 years old. The victim is used to filing frivolous FIRs against other persons as she is involved in honey-trap racket. There is three FIRs annexed as annexure no.4 to the affidavit filed with the bail application. The said three FIRs instituted by the same victim are as follows:- "(i) Case Crime No.294 of 2024, under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Thathipur, District Gwalior. (ii) Case Crime No.277 of 2024, under Section 64 B.N.S., P.S. Sadar Bazar, District Mathura. (iii) Case Crime No.578 of 2023, under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Ballabhgarh City, District Faridabad." 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the criminal history of six cases assigned to the applicant stands explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 21.03.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 8. 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 for bail is made out. 9. 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 in institution of FIR and the fact that the victim is used to filing frivolous FIRs against several persons, 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. 10. Let the applicant- Manoj Kumar, 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 pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 12. 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 :- 30.5.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad