Manish Kumar vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others

1. List has been revised. Learned State Law Officer has informed that the notice to the informant has been served on 23.04.2026, but none is present on behalf of the informant.

2. Heard Sri Ashish Goyal, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jai Kishan Chaurasia, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.86 of 2026, under Sections 65(1), 351(3) BNS and Section 3/4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station Fatehpur Sikri, District Agra, during the pendency of trial.

4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have raped the victim on 15.03.2026 at about 1:00 p.m. by taking her to the house of one Vishnu, pressurizing her to continue the said relationship, and even giving her certain poisonous tablets to administer to her family members, which were thrown away by her.

5. The learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by more than 2 days, and there is no explanation for the said delay. It is a clear-cut case of false implication, as the applicant and the family members of the victim carry animosity with each other. There is no medical corroboration of the incident either. The victim, by her physical appearance, seems to be major, although her age is 17 years as per ossification test report, and a leverage of 2 years may be granted to the applicant on the upper side. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 25.03.2026. He undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not misuse the liberty of bail.

6. Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute the submissions made by the counsel for the applicant.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the delay in the institution of the FIR and there being no medial corroboration of the incident, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima-facie the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

8. Let the applicant- Manish Kumar, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to verification of sureties, with the conditions that he shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as required.

9. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations herein shall not affect the trial on merits.

(Krishan Pahal,J.)

May 6, 2026

(Ravi Kant)