Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:93349 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17729 of 2025 Applicant :- Waseem Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Prabodh Dubey,Naushad Alam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Arvind Prabodh Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, 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. 93 of 2025, under Sections 333, 76, 115(2), 64(1), 351(3) B.N.S., 2023, Police Station Hayatpur, District Sambhal, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have outraged the modesty of the victim with the intention to disrobe her on 31.03.2025 at about 06:00 pm. 5. 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 FIR is delayed by about five days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the allegations of outraging the modesty were maintained in the statement of the victim recorded u/s 180 B.N.S.S. Subsequently, at the stage of recording of statement u/s 183 B.N.S.S., the victim has escalated the allegations to that of rape, but there is no medical corroboration of the offence of rape. Although, a contusion of 8x5 cm was found in right thigh of the victim but the said injury can be sustained anywhere and may be self-inflicted also. There is no allegation that applicant has caused injury to the thigh of the victim. 7. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 21.04.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that applicant had forced the victim on the floor but could not dispute the fact that the FIR did not whisper a single word about him. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration that FIR is delayed by about five days and there is no medical corroboration of the incident 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- Waseem, 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. Order Date :- 30.5.2025 Priya (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- PRIYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad