HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20810 of 2025 Court No. - 66 HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J. Heard Sri Satish Trivedi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Lallan Prasad, learned counsel for the first informant as also Sri Ajay Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 at the instance of the applicant Rameshwar Shivaji More has been filed seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 275 of 2025 under Section 64, 74, 78, 333, 115(2), 352, 351(2) and 351(3) of the BNS, Police Station Chiluatal, District Gorakhpur during the pendency of the trial before the court below. The bail application of the applicant before the court below was rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Act, Court No. 1, Gorakhpur vide order dated 29.05.2025 and the applicant is incarcerated in jail since 23.05.2025. Sri Satish Trivedi, learned Senior Counsel has vehemently argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this very case due to ulterior motive. It is submitted that the applicant is posted at RTC Gorakhpur and is a Government Servant. It is submitted that the FIR in question giving rise to Case Crime No. 275 of 2025 was lodged by resorting to the provisions of Section 173(4) of the BNSS with the allegation that on 27.08.2024 the applicant had been keeping an evil eye upon the first informant and also used to molest her but she did not complain out of decency and morality. The FIR further alleges that on 27.08.2024, while the husband was away training with the 26 battalion SSB, Maharajganj. The Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Kumar Pandey, Sheshadri Trivedi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Lallan Prasad Rameshwar Shivaji More .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) applicant entered into her quarter and subjected her to sexual assault. The FIR nominates the wife of the applicant also and both have been alleged to have threatened and abused the first informant and when the husband of the informant accosted the applicant on the said issue then the applicant assaulted and abused the husband of the informant as well on 03.12.2024. It is also argued that the FIR has been lodged after considerable delay which has not been explained. The incident alleged is of 27.08.2024 and the proceedings under Section 173(4) were drawn only on 18.02.2025 as is evident from the contents of the FIR itself. It is argued that it is highly improbable that the imformant kept mum for more than three months and thereafter lodged the present prosecution nominating the applicant and his wife. It is vehemently submitted that the present prosecution is a counter blast to the Case Crime No. 914 of 2024 lodged by the applicant on 16.12.2024 at Police Station Chiluatal, District Gorakhpur under Section 74 BNS and Section 9/10 of the POCSO Act nominating the husband of the first informant in which he is stated to have sexually assaulted the 9 years old daughter of the applicant. The present FIR was got lodged only after the submission of the police report in Case Crime No. 914 of 2024. It is also argued that the first informant/victim refused her medical examination and had undergone the procedure of hysterectomy two and half years back. It is also argued that charge sheet against the applicant has been submitted on 04.08.2205 and cognizance of the same has also been taken on 05.08.2025 and as such the custodial interrogation of the applicant is no longer required. The entire story of the prosecution is false and fabricated and the statements of the victim recorded under Section 180 and 183 of the BNS appears to be improbable and does not inspire confidence. The applicant has no criminal history and undertakes to abide by the conditions imposed by this Court if released on bail. The applicant undertakes to cooperate in the trial. Hence basil is prayed for. Learned AGA as also learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer of bail, but could not dispute the above submissions raised by learned Senior Counsel for the applicant. Considering all those facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima- BAIL No. 20810 of 2025 2 facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the accused-applicant, Rameshwar Shivaji More, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence. 2. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity. 3. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial. 4. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail. September 24, 2025 pks BAIL No. 20810 of 2025 3 (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- PAWAN KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad