JUDGMENT : Karunesh Singh Pawar, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. 2. None appears on behalf of the complainant. From perusal of ordersheet, it is evident that notice to the informant has been served. 3. The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.174 of 2024, under Sections 363, 354 and 506 IPC and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act, Police Station-Nakhasa, District-Sambhal. 4. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that applicant has molested and threatened the minor daughter of the first informant, aged about 15 years at Sambhal on the pretext of dropping her home when she was going to tution. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. In her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., victim has supported the prosecution case, however, while giving her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has made improvement and stated that she went with the applicant out of her own sweet will. There is material contradiction in the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., which creates doubt in the story of the prosecution. Apart from this case, applicant does not have any criminal history. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. He further submits that applicant is innocent and he is languishing in jail since 09.07.2024. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer and submits that there are serious allegations against the applicant, as such, he is not entitled for any relief. 7. On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that applicant is languishing in jail since 09.07.2024; contradictory statements of the victim recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. coupled with the fact that applicant has no criminal history, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 9. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant-Rahul be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions: (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.