Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:59476 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10002 of 2025 Applicant :- Vimlesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rajneesh Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

1. Heard Sri Rajneesh Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri R.P.Shukla, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA, for the State.

2. The instant application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 2 of 2025, under Sections 74,115(2) 131 and 108 BNS, Section 7/8 POCSO Act and Section 3(2)5 SC/ST Act,Police Station Ailau, District Mainpuri, during pendency of the trial.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per allegation applicant used to tease and torture the daughter of the informant aged about 16 years due to which she committed suicide but entire allegation levelled against him is totally false.

4. He further submits that even there is no cogent evidence of abetment against the applicant on record.

5. He further submits that actually applicant belongs to different caste and some time he used to talk with the deceased and due to this reason informant was having grudge with him and due to this reason he also used to scold her daughter and only due to his bad behaviour she committed suicide.

6. He further submits that however applicant has also been challaned under the provisions of SC/ST Act but from the FIR and other material available on record it could not be reflected that he committed any offence under the provisions of SC/ST Act.

7. He further submits that applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since

18.1.2025.

8. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant however, opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that deceased belonged to SC community and she was about 16 years old girl and applicant used to torture her and when her father, i.e., informant tried to make complaint against him then he also threatened him and due to this reason deceased committed suicide and, therefore, it cannot be said that there is no evidence of abetment against the applicant on record.

9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

10. However, as per allegation due to the abetment of the applicant deceased committed suicide, who was about 16 years of age but after considering entire material available on record, this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant that prima facie it appears that there is no cogent evidence of abetment against the applicant on record.

11. Further, however, applicant has also been challaned under the provisions of SC/ST Act but there is no allegation that as deceased belonged to SC Community, therefore, applicant used to tease and torture her.

12. Further, applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 18.1.2025.

13. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

14. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

15. Let the applicant-Vimlesh 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-social activity.

16. In case of breach of