HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19911 of 2026 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. It reflects, despite service of notice none appeared on behalf of informant. 2. Heard Sri V.K. Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajiv Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State. 3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.148 of 2024, under Sections 65(2), 351(2) BNS and Section 5M/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Surir, District Mathura, during pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however as per allegation applicant was labor and he was doing job in the school where victim studied and he made sexual assault upon her in the washroom but entire allegations levelled against applicant are totally false. He next submits, even there is no allegation of penetrative sexual assault against the applicant. 5. He next submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 08.07.2024 i.e. for last more than two years. 6. He further submits, therefore considering the above facts, applicant may be enlarged on bail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vinay Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pankaj Kumar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) 7. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits, victim was hardly five years old but could not dispute the other arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant including the fact that applicant is in jail for last more than two years. 8. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case. 9. However, it reflects, as per allegation applicant made sexual assault upon the victim who was hardly five years old but it is not a case of penetrative sexual assault. 10. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail for last more than two years. 11. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, particularly long incarceration of applicant of more than two years, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 12. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 13. Let the applicant - Pankaj Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti- BAIL No. 19911 of 2026 2 social activity. 14. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 15. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. October 1, 2026 Shahroz BAIL No. 19911 of 2026 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAHROJ ALAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad