HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33388 of 2025 Court No. - 66 HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Vipin Gangwar, learned counsel for the first informant and Shri Arimardan Yadav, learned AGA, representing the State respondents. This bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant, Vijay, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 160 of 2025, under sections 333, 65 (1), 351 (3) B.N.S. and 3/4 (2) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station-Bhuta, District-Bareilly. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused-applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number and is languishing in jail since 23.04.2025. First Information Report has been lodged on 17.04.2025 with a delay of four days without any plausible explanation, in respect of an incident said to have occurred on 16/17.04.2025 against the applicant with the allegation that on the date of incident the applicant entered into the house of the first informant and raped the minor daughter of the first informant and on hue and cry made by the victim the family members of the applicant caught hold the applicant and handed over the police personnel by dialing 112. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that from the perusal of the General diary detail dated 23.04.2025 it is clear that the applicant has been arrested on 23.04.2025 on an information of the informer. The prosecution case in the FIR stands belied. He further submits that there is contradiction in the statement of the victim under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS as in statement under Section 180 she has stated that the applicant has tried to attempt rape whereas in the statement under Section 183 she has stated that the applicant had committed rape with her. The applicant has no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the first infomrant have vehemently Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajnish Kumar Pandey, Santosh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Vijay .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) opposed, but could not dispute the fact that applicant has no criminal antecedents. 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 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, Vijay, 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 26, 2025 Deepak/ BAIL No. 33388 of 2025 2 (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- DEEPAK KUMAR KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad