Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:42008 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27352 of 2024 Applicant :- Vijay Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Pandey,Nikil Pathak,Sunil Kumar Dwivedi,Sunil Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mehdi Abbas,Rohan Gupta Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Affidavit of compliance filed by learned A.G.A. and supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant are taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Saurabh Kumar Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Sri Mehdi Abbas, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Yogesh Mishra, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.292 of 2024, under Sections 376(3) I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station- Kotwali Dehat, District- Bulandshahr, during the pendency of trial. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The victim has given birth to a baby-boy subsequent to the corporeal relationship with the applicant. The applicant is ready to take care of his wife and the offspring both. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the informant has been examined during trial as PW-1 and he has completely resiled from his earlier statements and has been cross- examined by the public prosecutor after declaring him hostile. The victim, PW-2 has categorically stated that she was in love with the applicant and is 19 years old. She has given birth to a baby-boy. There is no likelihood of conviction of the applicant in the present case. 7. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. There is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 29.5.2024 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. Per contra, learned State Law Officer and learned counsel for the informant have stated that they have no objection, if the applicant is ready to take care of the victim and her offspring. 9. In light of the judgement of the Supreme Court passed in Niranjan Singh and another vs Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote and others AIR 1980 SC 785, this Court has avoided detailed examination of the evidence and elaborate documentation of the merits of the case as no party should have the impression that his case has been prejudiced. A prima facie satisfaction of case is needed but it is not the same as an exhaustive exploration of the merits in the order itself. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the settled law of the Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690 and Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595 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. 11. Let the applicant- Vijay, 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 take care of his wife (victim) and the offspring born out of the said corporeal relationship. The applicant shall deposit (fixed deposit) a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- in the name of the infant in the guardianship of his mother (victim) within a period of three months from the date of his release from jail. (ii) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence. (iii) 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. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 13. 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 :- 21.3.2025 Vikas (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad