Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:13767 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38000 of 2024 Applicant :- Sardar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Nanhe Lal Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J. 1-Heard Ms. Priya Chand, learned Advocate holding brief of Mr. Nanhe Lal Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State. 2-The instant bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 33 of 2024, under Sections 376, 366, 342, 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Girar, District-Lalitpur, during the pendency of trial. 3-As per the prosecution case in brief, complainant who is mother of the victim lodged a first information report on 27.06.2024 against the applicant for the offence under Sections 366 and 376 I.P.C. stating inter-alia that her daughter aged about 20 years, without giving any information, had gone somewhere on 07.06.2024, regarding which a missing report was lodged on 08.06.2024. On 26.06.2024, complainant came to know that his daughter is in Indore and when she along with her brother went to Indore, victim told her that the applicant lured and enticed her away to Indore and forcibly made physical relation with her. 4-The main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that as per the prosecution case itself, victim is major aged about 20 years. It is next submitted that on 07.06.2024, victim had left her house without giving any information to her family members and had gone with the applicant to Indore as she was consenting party with the applicant, therefore, it is not a case of rape but a case of consensual relation between the applicant and victim, hence, the applicant who is languishing in jail since 30.06.2024 may be enlarged on bail. 5-On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant but could not dispute the factum of the case as argued on behalf of the applicant. 6-Having heard the submission of learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that it is not dispute that the victim has travelled with the applicant from Lalitpur to Indore but she did not protest whereas she had ample opportunity to raise alarm. I also find that the victim had stayed with the applicant in Indore for about 20 days' on an accommodation taken on rent. The statement of the victim also indicates that the applicant used to go to his job leaving the victim at the house but she did not make any complaint to anyone and has voluntarily stayed in the company of the applicant, hence, possibility of victim being consenting with the applicant cannot be ruled out. 7-Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed. 8-Let the applicant-Sardar, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable. (ii) That 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 ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity. (iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned before the release of the applicant on bail. 9-In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant. Order Date :- 27.1.2025 Saurabh Digitally signed by :- SAURABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad