Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:78794 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16343 of 2025 Applicant :- Ritesh Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Gyanendra Kumar Singh,Sheo Karan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. As informed by learned A.G.A., notice has been served to the informant on 3.5.2025. 2. Heard Sri Gyanendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant Sri Krishna Mohan Singh, as well as Sri A.K. Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 67 of 2025, U/S 65(1) B.N.S. read with Section 5(L)/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Nagra, District Ballia, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have committed rape with the victim twice on 22.2.2025 at abotu 10.00 am. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that 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. It is stated that he has nothing to do with the said offence. It is stated that FIR is delayed by three days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has further stated that there is no medical corroboration of the incident, as the victim has not sustained any internal or external injury, whatsoever. 7. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 28.2.2025. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the cousin grand-father of the victim is a practicing lawyer at District Court, Ballia, and when he came back to the village, then only the FIR could be instituted, otherwise, under the pressure of the applicant, the FIR was not being instituted. The victim does not have her parents alive, as such, she has been ravished by the applicant in the instant case. She is a minor girl, aged about 14 years, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 9. 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 and there being no medical corroboration of the incident, 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- Ritesh Singh 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. 11. 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. 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 :- 14.5.2025 Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad