Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:13554 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1587 of 2025 Applicant :- Sachin Alias Cheenu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Prakash Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA apprised the Court that on 8.1.2025 notice has been served to the informant. Despite service of notice, none appeared on behalf of the informant. 2. Heard Sri Amit Prakash Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applican and Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA for the State- respondent. 3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 253 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 140(4), 351(2) BNS and 5(g)/6 POCSO Act and 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act, Police Station Babugarh, District Hapur, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 4. FIR of the present case was lodged against the applicant and two other named accused persons and one unknown person and according to the FIR, applicant and another accused committed sodomy upon the son of the informant, aged about 17 years. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that on the basis of false allegations, applicant has been made accused in the present matter. 6. He further submitted that however, victim i.e. son of the informant in his statement recorded under section 180 BNSS repeated the version of the FIR and stated that applicant and others made unnatural intercourse against him but entire allegation levelled against the applicant and others is totally false. 7. He further submitted that even medical report of the victim does not corroborate his version as from its perusal it reflects that he did not sustain any injury on or around his anal region. 8. He further submitted that merely on minor issue some dispute arose between both the sides and thereafter applicant has falsely been made accused in the present matter. 9. He further submitted that apart from the present case, applicant is however having criminal history of five other cases but his criminal antecedents have been explained in the instant bail application. 10. He further submitted that law is settled that if otherwise case of bail is made out then merely on the basis of criminal antecedents bail application of the applicant should not be withheld. 11. He further submitted that in the present matter applicant is in jail since 29.8.2024 i.e. for last five months. 12. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 13. He, however, further pointed out that apart from the present case, applicant is actually having criminal history of seven other cases but he fairly conceded that out of seven cases, remaining two unexplained cases relate to minor offences. 14. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 15. However, as per allegation applicant committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon the son of the informant who was about 17 years but from perusal of the medical report of the victim, it reflects that he did not sustain any injury. 16. Further, however, applicant apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of seven other cases and out of seven cases, he has explained criminal history of only five cases in the instant bail applicant but remaining two cases as disclosed by learned AGA appears to be the cases of minor offences. 17. Further, this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that if, otherwise case of bail is made out then ordinarily merely on the basis of criminal antecedents, bail application of an accused should not be withheld. 18. Further, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 29.8.2024 i.e. for last five months. 19. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 20. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 21. Let the applicant-Sachin Alias Cheenu, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 22. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 23. 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 :- 27.1.2025 Ankita Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad