Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:25527 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42162 of 2024 Applicant :- Kapil Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Haya Rizvi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajiv Kumar Mishra,Shyam Chandra Pandey Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Haya Rizvi, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Ifra Islam, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 233 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 65(1), 123, 87 of B.N.S. and Section 3/4 (2) of POCSO Act, Police StationAurangabad, District Bulandshahr during the pendency of trial. 4. The informant instituted the F.I.R. stating that his daughter aged about 15 years has been enticed away by the applicant on 04.09.2024 at about 01:30 AM from his house. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The victim is a consenting party which is evident from her statement recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. whereby she has categorically stated that she had gone with the applicant all the way to Debai thereupon she went to Badaun and stayed there. Although, she has stated that she was rendered unconscious by giving her certain noxious material and her marriage was solemnized in unconscious state. There are allegations of establishing corporeal relationship against the applicant also without her consent. The victim by her looks seems to be major, although, in her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., she has mentioned her age to be 16 years. As per school certificate, which does not mention the class in which she studied, her date of birth is mentioned as 01.02.2009, as such, her age comes out to be 15 years 7 months and 3 days. The said document is not admissible in light of Section 94 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act. 6. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 20.09.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 8. In the case of P. Yuvaprakash vs State Rep. by Inspector of Police, AIR 2023 SC 3525, the Supreme Court has observed that in the absence of records relating to the birth of the victim, no other documents except the Matriculation or equivalent certificate from the concerned examination board or certificate by a corporation, municipal authority or a Panchayat can be relied upon to ascertain the age of the victim. 9. The Supreme Court in the case of Niranjan Singh and another vs. Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote and Others, AIR 1980 SC 785 has avoided detailed examination of the evidence and elaborate documentation of the merits of the case as no party should have the impression that his case has been prejudiced. A prima facie satisfaction of case is needed but it is not the same as an exhaustive exploration of the merits in the order itself. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the settled law of the Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690 and Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant- Kapil, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence. (ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 13. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 20.2.2025 Karan (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- KARAN KUMAR RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad