ANILversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
         CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13657 of 2025

Anil
                                                           .....Applicant(s)
                                  Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others
                                                               .....Opposite
                                                                     Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Ishwar Chandra Tyagi, Ram Charan Lal
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 65
                 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State
and perused the record.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the initially F.I.R.
was lodged under Section 354(Ka) I.P.C., and Section 10 of POCSO Act
and during the course of investigation, Section 376AB I.P.C., and Section
5(m)/6 of POCSO was incorporated dropping the earlier Sections.
Learned counsel has further contended that though the victim is aged
about 3-4 years, the alleged incident had taken place on 28.02.2022 and
that the F.I.R. was lodged on the same day. He further submits that
perusal of the supplementary medico legal report of the victim dated
28.02.2022 goes to show that no spermatozoa alive or dead seen in the
slide and it has been finally opined that no opinion can be given about
sexual assault/violence. Learned counsel thus argued that the medical
evidence does not corroborate with the prosecution version. Learned
counsel has contended that earlier there was an allegation against the
applicant that the applicant had stabbed the the Jethani of mother of the
victim, which was commenced as Sessions Trial No. 899 of 2011 (State
Vs. Vijay alilas Kalia and another) arising out of Case Crime No. 1515 of
2011 under Sections 302/34 I.P.C., in which case, the applicant was
acquitted vide acquittal order dated 29.01.2016, copy of which Judgement
and order is annexed as Annexure-8 to the affidavit accompanying the
bail application. Learned counsel has next argued that since then the
informant had grudge against the applicant and in a fit of rage, the
applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel
                                                       BAIL No. 13657 of 2025
                               2


has next argued that though the trial of the present case has commenced
being Sessions Trial No. 104 of 2022 (State Vs. Anil) in which, charges
were framed long back on 18.05.2022 and till date only one witness has
been examined. Learned counsel next argued that the applicant is
languishing in jail since 02.03.2022 and that the trial is progressing at a
slow pace, which is not likely to be concluded in near future and has
relied upon the judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the
case of Indrani Pratim Mukerjea Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation
and another passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 1627 of 2022
to submit that prolonged incarceration of a person as an under trial is
against his fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of
India. It is submitted that there is no occasion now for the applicant to
tamper with any witness or to flee from judicial process. Several other
submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made
against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The
circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication
of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on
behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of
law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever
required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court
may deem fit to impose upon him.

3. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the
applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be
adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence.

4. After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar
and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this
case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing
material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence,
without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court is of the
view, that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

5. Let applicant Anil involved in Case Crime No.197 of 2022 under
Sections 376AB I.P.C., and Section 5(m)/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station
Baradari, District Bareilly be released on bail on furnishing a personal
bond and two local heavy sureties each of the like amount to the
                                                                                             BAIL No. 13657 of 2025
                                                                    3


                                    satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

                                    i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

                                    ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

                                    iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.

                                    iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of
                                    which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.

                                    v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement,
                                    threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as
                                    to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police
                                    officer or tamper with the evidence.

                                    6. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial Court shall be
                                    at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant in accordance with law.

                                    7. The bail application is allowed.




                                                                                   (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)
                                    March 19, 2026
                                    S.Ali




Digitally signed by :-
SHAUKAT ALI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad