HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17531 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri B.K. Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.35 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 127(2) B.N.S. and 9/10 POCSO Act, Police Station- Jalalpur, District- Hamirpur, during the pendency of trial. 4. 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 allegations are per se false. The FIR is delayed by about eight hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that there is no medical corroboration of the incident. It is true that age of the victim is too tender, but it is a clear cut case of false implication. The informant owed an amount towards the applicant and he has instituted the FIR as a counterblast to usurp the said amount. 6. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant has been explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 27.3.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : B.K. Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Lakhan Mishra .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) liberty of bail. 7. Per contra, learned State Law Officer 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 of 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 there being no medical corroboration of the incident, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima facie, 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- Lakhan Mishra, 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 pressurize/intimidate 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. September 15, 2025 Vikas Verma BAIL No. 17531 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad