Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:85216 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17547 of 2025 Applicant :- Uday Pratap Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rajendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Amit Kumar, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.73 of 2025, U/S 69 B.N.S. and 67 Information Technology Act, Police Station Pachokhara, District Firozabad, during the pendency of trial. PROSECUTION STORY: 4. The applicant is stated to have established corporeal relationship with the victim on the false promise of marriage and subsequently, is stated to have clicked certain video of her and made it viral on social media, thereby tarnishing her image, as such, the victim had instituted the FIR on 25.4.2025 at about 1.20 pm. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT: 5. 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. 6. The FIR is delayed and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 7. The victim is major and is the consenting party. She has not supported the allegations made in the FIR in her statement recorded 183 B.N.S.S., whereby she has stated that she has no knowledge about any indecent photograph or video. She has further stated therein that she does not want any action against the applicant. 8. The applicant is languishing in jail since 29.4.2025 having no criminal history and in case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE/OPPOSITE PARTY: 9. The bail application has been opposed on the ground that the applicant has misused his clout. The victim has herself instituted the FIR and stated that her video has been made viral by the applicant. The said fact stands fortified from the statement of the brother of the victim, as has stated that he has watched the video which was transferred to the mobile of his father as one view message, and he has given the said video to the investigating officer, which has been taken into possession by him, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail, as the investigation is still going on. CONCLUSION: 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, the fact that the video being made available to the investigating officer and the investigation is still going on, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail at this stage. 11. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. 12. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 21.5.2025 Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad