Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:87690 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16470 of 2025 Applicant :- Raju Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Arpit Dube,Pulak Ganguly,Sharda Sharma 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 12.5.2025. 2. Heard Sri Pulak Ganguly, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri A.K. Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 237 of 2025, U/S 74, 352, 65(1) IPC and 3/4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station Tajganj, District Agra, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have outraged the modesty of the victim on 9.4.2025 at about 8.00 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. FIR is delayed by about two days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has further argued that the allegations of outraging of modesty of the victim were made in the FIR and the same were reiterated in the statement of the victim recorded u/s 180 B.N.S.S. The allegations have been escalated to that of rape at the stage of recording of her statement u/s 183 B.N.S.S., that too, after legal consultation. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. 7. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 10.4.2025. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but has not disputed the fact that there is no criminal history of the applicant and the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the applicant. 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- Raju 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 :- 23.5.2025 Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad