An accused may be granted bail on the grounds of parity when co-accused with similar or greater complicity are released, especially when the charge sheet is filed and direct evidence of primary offenses is lacking.

1. No one appeared on behalf of the first informant despite service of notice.

2. Heard Sri Vishveshwar Mani Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Roshan Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No.561 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 70(2) B.N.S. and Section 5L /6 POCSO Act and Section 3(1) of Immoral Traffic Prevention, Act and Section 3(2)(Va), 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act , Police Station-Chauri Chaura, District-Gorakhpur.

4. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that initially FIR was lodged against unknown person with the allegation that the daughter of the first informant was missing; thereafter the victim girl was recovered by the police. The victim girl in her statement under Section 180 clearly stated that she herself left the house and started living with co-accused Vineet. However, the victim in her statement under Section 183 BNSS changed the entire prosecution story and stated that a person abducted her and forced her to indulge in prostitution, though no allegation was made in that statement against the present applicant. The name of the applicant surfaced in the statement co-accused Dilshad, who came into picture in the statement of another co-accused, in which allegation was made against the applicant that he was the driver of tempo wherein the victim was sitting. It is further submitted that there is no material regarding his involvement for committing the rape. The entire prosecution story itself is very doubtful and the victim herself made contrary statement which shows that victim herself was involved in prostitution. It is lastly submitted that co-accused Manvendra Pandey @ Vineet Pandey, Ajay Nishad and Dharmraj Mauray have already been released on bail by a Co-ordinate Benches of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.19428 of 2026 vide order dated 17.06.2026, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.20272 of 2026 vide order dated 18.06.2026 and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.18489 of 2026 vide order dated 25.06.2026, respectively. Therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. Applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 08.04.2026. He further submitted that charge sheet has been filed by the police, therefore, there is no requirement for custodial interrogation. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact.

6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and also keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and also taking into account overcrowded jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases before the trial courts as well as considering the mandate of the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Kapil Wadhawan vs Central Bureau of Investigation reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 3038 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed

7. Let the applicant- Monu @ Manish Rajbhar involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the co