Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:32776 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1547 of 2025 Applicant :- Mahtab Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shivam Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,R.K. Mishra Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Shivam Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 208 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 64(1), 115(2) of BNS and Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Fatehpur, District - Saharanpur, during the pendency of trial. 4. 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 as alleged in the FIR. Learned counsel has also stated that the victim is the consenting party as is evident from her statement recorded u/s 183 BNSS. 5. Learned counsel has also stated that the applicant had promised the victim to marry her but subsequently refused to comply with the said promise and left her in a lurch in the common area. The victim is major aged about 19 years as per ossification test report. Criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant has been explained as he has been acquitted in the said case. 6. 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. The applicant is languishing in jail since 13.11.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the families of both parties have agreed to marry them, as such, he has no objection to release the applicant on bail. 8. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application but could not agitated the fact as stated by learned counsel for the informant. 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- Mahtab, 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. (ii) 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./ 351BNSS 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:- 6.3.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad