Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:89075 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16784 of 2025 Applicant :- Nikhil Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar Tiwari,Gaurav Singh Sirohi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Atul Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Learned State Law Officer has informed that the notice to the informant has been served on 15.05.2025. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.30 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 87, 64 B.N.S. and Section 5L/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Ahraula, District Azamgarh, during the pendency of trial. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about two days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The victim is major as per her own statement as she has stated that her family members were hell bent on marrying her off elsewhere, as such, she had married the applicant as she loved him. She has expressed her willingness to stay with him only. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the victim has stated that she was not subjected to any sexual assault by the applicant. The criminal history of two cases assigned to the applicant stands explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 01.03.2025 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 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 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 the FIR coupled with the fact that the victim seems to be a consenting party 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- Nikhil, 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 :- 26.5.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad