HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26114 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Ram Babu Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Pooja Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for High Court Legal Service Committee as well as Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 135 of 2025, under Sections 115(2) B.N.S. and 5m/6 POCSO Act, Police Station- Tundla, District- Firozabad, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the FIR was instituted against the applicant of having committed unnatural offence with the son of the informant who was living with his maternal-grand-mother. 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. No date and time of offence is mentioned in the FIR. Subsequently, in the statement of victim, it has come up that the date of offence is 10.4.2025, but there is no medical corroboration of the said incident. The FIR is delayed by about three days from the date of offence and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. As such, it is a clear cut case of false implication. 6. 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 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ram Babu Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Pooja Tripathi Rahul .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) since 13.4.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for High Court Legal Service Committee and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the delay of three days in institution of FIR and there being 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. 9. Let the applicant- Rahul, 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. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 11. 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. September 11, 2025 Vikas Verma BAIL No. 26114 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad