HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33574 of 2025 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant and perused the record. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is named in the F.I.R. In the F.I.R. the informant who is mother of the victim has alleged that on the false pretext of marriage the applicant was establishing sexual relations with her daughter for the last eight years and on the date of occurrence he took her daughter. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. the victim has stated that she is aged about 21 years, she was in relationship with the applicant, she loves her, on 02.06.2024 they both went to Ghaziabad and solemnized marriage and she is happy with her marriage with the applicant, whereas, in her statement recorded under Section 164 she alleges that she was in relationship with the applicant since 2017, on 02.06.2024 the applicant called her and asked that since she has got aborted her pregnancy therefore, they have to marry, thereafter, on 18.06.2024 they solemnized marriage with each other, after marriage she lived with the applicant for one month, thereafter, he left her. Learned counsel has drawn attention of this Court to the statement of concerned doctor, who states that there is no record in her hospital that on that very date the victim had got aborted her pregnancy, thus, there are material contradictions in both the statements of the victim and the statement of doctor also does not corroborate with the allegation of victim. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that as per the statements of the victim it appears that consensual sexual relations were made between them, thus, victim was a consenting party and the applicant has falsely been implicated in the case. 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 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shekhar Gangal Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Manoj Kumar Srivastava Jatin .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 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. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 06.08.2025, having no criminal history. 3. Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that innocence of applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. 4. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence and without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed. 5. Let the applicant-Jatin, be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 421 of 2024, under Sections 366, 376, 323 I.P.C., Police Station- Bannadevi, District- Aligarh, on executing a personal bond and furnishing two local sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with 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 any 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 default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant in accordance with law. October 10, 2025 Mustaqeem. BAIL No. 33574 of 2025 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad