Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:88992 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16698 of 2025 Applicant :- Arpit Soni Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Buddha Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. As informed by learned AGA, notice to the informant has been served on 12.05.2025 but none is present on behalf of the informant. 2. Heard Sri Buddha Prakash, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 191 of 2024, under Sections 65(1), 351(3), 352 of BNS and Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Haldi, District - Ballia, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have established corporeal relationship with the victim on the false promise of marriage and had later on left her at her house. On 13.08.2024, the applicant is stated to have enticed her away on motorcycle bearing no. UP60 J 4368 and had left her after sexually molesting her. Again on 15.09.2024, the applicant is stated to have forcibly established corporeal relationship with the victim. 5. 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 20 days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has further stated that the victim is more than 18 years old as per ossification test report. There is no medical corroboration of the incident although it is mentioned in her medical report that there was breach in her private part but the said breach does not indicate any use of force. It is also stated that the victim has categorically stated in her statement recorded u/s 183 BNSS that the applicant is ready to marry her. 7. Learned counsel has next contended that there is no clinching evidence to suggest that the applicant misled the victim from the beginning. The informant has converted a failed consensual physical relationship into a criminal case. It is also stated that there is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 06.10.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history. 9. The Supreme Court in Pramod Suryabhan Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra and Another, 2019 (9) SCC 608 and Ansaar Mohammad vs. State of Rajasthan and Another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 886, has stated that entering into any kind of corporeal relationship with a person on the false promise to marry cannot be termed as rape. 10. This Court has avoided expressing its opinion as the case hinges on whether the applicant's promise of marriage was genuine or false and whether the physical relationship was consensual or not. It is for the Trial Court to draw a conclusion which will depend on the evidence presented before it and its interpretation as per law. 11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, delay of 20 days in lodging the FIR and taking into consideration the fact that medical report of the victim does not indicate any use of force coupled by the judgements of Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690 and Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595 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. 12. Let the applicant- Arpit Soni, 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 will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 13. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 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:- 26.5.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad