Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:82734 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4044 of 2025 Applicant :- Sunil Saroj Opposite Party :- State Of .U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Yadav,Mahesh Kumar Yadav,Nityanand Srivastava,Pradeep Kumar,Pramod Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Pramod Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.366 of 2024, under Sections 376 I.P.C., Police Station- Devgaon, District- Azamgarh, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have established corporeal relationship with the victim for about seven years when she was minor. The applicant is stated to have promised to solemnize marriage with the victim, but subsequently refused to do so and kept on establishing the said relationship. The victim is stated to be pregnant at the time of institution of FIR by about six months. 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. The FIR is delayed by about ten months from the date of incident and is further delayed by seven years from the alleged onset of relationship. There is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the allegations that it was the applicant who had impregnated the victim stand falsified from the birth certificate of the child, which has been filed as Annexure-SA1 to the supplementary affidavit filed on 3.3.2025. The said birth certificate indicates the name of the father of the child to be Ajay Kumar, who happens to be husband of the victim. 7. It is also contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the victim was married to one Ajay Kumar and she started living separately. Had the offence been committed with the victim as alleged in the FIR, the name of child's father would not have been wrongly recorded in the birth certificate. 8. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no medical corroboration of the incident. There is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 20.12.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 9. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the inordinate delay in institution of FIR and the birth certificate of the child of the victim, 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- Sunil Saroj, 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. 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 :- 17.5.2025 Vikas (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad