Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:91140 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17208 of 2025 Applicant :- Sonu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Hanuman Prasad Kushwaha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Hanuman Prasad Kushwaha, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Satya Narayan Gupta, learned counsel for the informant as well as Ms. Ifrah Islam, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 94 of 2025, U/S 65(1), 351(2) B.N.S. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Bar, District Lalitpur, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have committed rape with the victim on 19.3.2025 at about 1.00 pm by forcing her into his house. 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 five days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has further argued that the victim seems to be the consenting party, as is evident from her statement recorded u/s 183 B.N.S.S., whereby she has stated that she found herself disrobed from below her abdomen. There is no medical corroboration of the incident, as such, it is a clear-cut case of false implication. 7. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 24.3.2025. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Learned State Law Officer and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the counsel for the applicant has not annexed the complete statement of the witnesses and that they are threatening the witnesses. Learned counsel has further argued that no FSL report has yet been filed. 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, the statement of the victim recorded u/s 183 B.N.S.S. 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- Sonu 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 :- 28.5.2025 Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad