HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30510 of 2025 Court No. - 66 HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record. 2. This bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant, Mohit Tomar, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 105 of 2024, under Section 376, 313, 493 IPC and Section 67A I.T. Act, Police Station Wave City, District Ghaziabad during the pendency of the trial before the Court below. 3. 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 01.06.2025. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has made physical relation with the prosecutrix on the pretext of false promise of marriage. Later, the applicant refused for solemnization of marriage with her. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that prosecutrix is major. The relationship between the applicant and victim was going on since long, but after some time i.e. on 09.06.2023 the relationship between them has been broken and, thereafter, the prosecutrix has lodged the present FIR. It is submitted that the present FIR was lodged under Sections 493 IPC and 67A I.T. Act and during investigation the prosecutrix has failed to give any evidence regarding the viral of Video in the Social Media and she also could not give any evidence regarding abortion hence in absence of evidence, the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mandvi Tripathi, Santosh Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Dhirendra Mohan Chaudhary, G.A. Mohit Tomar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Investigating Officer exonerated the applicant of the offence under section 67A I.T. Act and Section 313 IPC. After completing investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted charge-sheet against the applicant only under Section 376 and 493 IPC. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Mahesh Damu Khare versus The State of Maharashtra and another, reported in 2024 (0) Supreme (SC) 1086 has held as under:- "In our view, if a man is accused of having sexual relationship by making a false promise of marriage and if he is to be held criminally liable, any such physical relationship must be traceable directly to the false promise made and not qualified by other circumstances or consideration. A woman may have reasons to have physical relationship other than the promise of marriage made by the man, such as personal liking for the male partner without insisting upon formal marital ties. Thus, in a situation where physical relationship is maintained for a prolonged period knowingly by the woman, it cannot be said with certainty that the said physical relationship was purely because of the alleged promise made by the appellant to marry her. Thus, unless it can be shown that the physical relationship was purely because of the promise of marriage, thereby having a direct nexus with the physical relationship without being influenced by any other consideration, it cannot be said that there was vitiation of consent under misconception of fact." 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has criminal antecedent one more case, which has been explained in para 24 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application 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. 7. Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. 8. Considering all above 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. 9. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. BAIL No. 30510 of 2025 2 10. Let the accused-applicant, Mohit Tomar, 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. 11. 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 24, 2025 v.k.updh. BAIL No. 30510 of 2025 3 (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad