Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:80650 Court No. - 47 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34561 of 2024 Applicant :- Shivam Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of Up And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Dileep Kumar Shukla,Mohit Singh,Ram Kesh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anurodh Tripathi,G.A. Hon'ble Siddharth,J. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. Heard Sri Mohit Singh, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Anurodh Tripathi, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State. There are allegations against the applicant of committing the offences of rape and penetrative sexual assault against minor girl belonging to scheduled caste. Counsel for the applicant has submitted that although the victim is minor but her medical report does not supports the prosecution case at all. It is a case of false implication on account of enmity between the parties. The child victim has been examined before the trial court as P.W.-2. She has stated before the trial court that before the doctor she stated that some unknown person has violated her. She has further stated that at the time of recording her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C her mother accompanied her. Her mother told the victim what to state before the court and not to spare the applicant. She gave the statement before the Magistrate as tutored by her mother. She has taught her what was to be stated before the Magistrate. Counsel for the applicant also submits that from the statement of victim, it is clear that it is a case of false implication. The supplementary medical report of victim was found to be negative and except some tenderness and redness found on her vulva nothing was found. He has further submitted that vulva is external female genital organ and redness and tenderness on the same can be caused by other reasons also. In the absence of any internal assault found on the private part of victim, the implication of applicant cannot be justified for the alleged offences. He is in jail since 31.05.2024 and has no criminal history to his credit. Trial has already commenced and the statement of victim have been recorded. There is no possibility of tampering with the evidence. On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials 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. Let the applicant, Shivam Yadav, involved in Case Crime No. 76 of 2024, under Sections- 376(3) IPC, Section 4(2) of POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 3(2)v of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Shaktinagar, District- Sonbhadra, 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 the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. 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. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 15.5.2025 Rohit Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad