HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31157 of 2026 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Dinesh Kumar, learned counsel for the informant and Sri S.S. Pandey, learned AGA for the State- opposite party, and perused the material available on record. 2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 169 of 2026, under Sections 74, 78, 107, 351(3) of the B.N.S. and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Rampur Maniharan, District Saharanpur, during the pendency of the trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per the statement of Dr. Sameer Sharma, the alleged victim was admitted on 17.05.2026 and was discharged on 19.05.2026. The medical record itself demonstrates that the alleged victim survived the incident. In the absence of any death by suicide, the basic and foundational requirement for an offence under Section 107 B.N.S. is conspicuously absent. At this stage, there is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The applicant is in jail since 19.05.2026 having no criminal history and in case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA have opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that the essential ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 107 BNS are not made out. Further the applicant has presently remained confined for more than three months and after submission of Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shravana Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Dinesh Kumar, G.A. Ajay Kumar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. 6. Let the applicant, Ajay Kumar involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: i. the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court. 7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. September 11, 2026 Abhishek BAIL No. 31157 of 2026 2 (Vivek Varma, J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad