HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31578 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Nitin Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant 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.209 of 2021, under Sections 354Ga, 506 I.P.C. and 67A of IT Act, Police Station- Mau Aima, District- Prayagraj, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the allegations are that the indecent video of the daughter of the informant was sent from the mobile of the applicant to that of the informant, and subsequently, he was threatened by other mobile numbers to make it viral on social media. There are two mobile numbers mentioned from which call was made for demand of ransom. 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. It is a clear cut case of false implication as there is no recovery of any video whatsoever. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the applicant was granted bail during the period of COVID-19 pandemic, but subsequently, he had challenged the said final report (charge-sheet) submitted against him and the same was disposed of by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anuj Pratap Singh, Nitin Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Umesh Kumar Singh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) dated 21.5.2025 passed in Application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. No.40558 of 2024 and the applicant was directed to apply for bail. 7. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant as a bona fide act surrendered before the court concerned and his bail application was rejected by the Special Judge (POCSO Act). There is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 9.6.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the fact that there is no recovery of any indecent video whatsoever, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima facie, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant- Umesh Kumar Singh, 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. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 12. 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 23, 2025 Vikas Verma BAIL No. 31578 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad