Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:77852 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42224 of 2024 Applicant :- Sohel Ansari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Yadav,Subhash Chandra Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. The instant matter is nominated to this bench vide order of Hon'ble The Chief Justice dated 26.03.2025. 2. Sri Santosh Nigam, learned AGA for the State apprised the Court that notice has been served upon informant on 08.11.2024 but despite service of notice none appeared on behalf of the informant. 3. Heard Sri Subhash Chandra Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Santosh Nigam, learned AGA for the State. 4. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.581 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) BNS & 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Sehjanwa, District Gorakhpur, during pendency of the trial. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that FIR of the present case was lodged against unknown persons with regard to the missing of the daughter of the informant aged about 15 years but during investigation when victim was recovered and her statement was recorded then applicant was made accused in the present matter. He next submits that from the statements of the victim, it reflects that she herself had gone along with applicant and she herself performed marriage with the applicant, therefore, she did not make any allegation against the applicant. 6. He further submits that however, from the school record of the victim, it reflects that at the time of incident, she was aged about 15 years but actually, victim is major aged about 18 years and even look wise she appears like a major girl. He next submits that applicant and victim were having close friendship and victim herself had gone along with him and at that time applicant was not aware about her age. 7. He further submits that from the statements of victim recorded during investigation, it could not be reflected that it is a case of forceful rape. He next submits that it is a case of adolescent love as age of the applicant is also about 19-20 years. 8. He further submits that applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 27.09.2024 i.e. for last more than 6 months. 9. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that as victim is aged about 15 years of age as per her school records, therefore, her consent is immaterial but he could not dispute the fact that from the statements of the victim, it could not be reflected that it is a case of forceful rape. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter, he is in jail since 27.09.2024 i.e. for last more than 6 months. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. However, as per school record, victim on the date of incident appears to be aged about 15 years but from her statements recorded during investigation, it reflects that she did not make any accusation against the applicant and she categorically stated that she herself had gone along with applicant and had performed marriage with her. 12. Further, during investigation, the ossification test of the victim has not been conducted and only evidence with regard to the age of the victim is her school record and genuineness of the date of birth mentioned in school records can only be ascertained at the time of trial. Further, Applicant also appears to be aged about 19- 20 years and, prima facie, it appears to be a case of love affair and in view of this Court, by ignoring statements of the victim recorded during investigation and also age of the applicant and victim, bail application of an accused should not be dismissed. 13. Further, applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 27.09.2024 i.e. for last more than 6 months. 14. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 15. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 16. Let the applicant - Sohel Ansari 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. 17. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 18. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 9.5.2025 S.A. Digitally signed by :- SALMAN AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad