Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:79810 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47396 of 2024 Applicant :- Sonu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Aditya Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Raj Kumar Mishra,Vijyeta Gupta Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Compliance affidavit filed today is taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Aditya Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Gorakh Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Sri Raj Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the informant, Ms. Vijyeta Gupta, learned counsel for High Court Legal Service Committee, Sri R.P. Singh, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.173 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 65(1) B.N.S. and 3/4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station Jaswant Nagar, District Etawah, during the pendency of trial. 5. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant on 02.08.2024 at about 6:30 p.m. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about five days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The victim by her looks seems to be major, although as per class-VIIIth school certificate, her date of birth is 10.04.2009, as such, her age comes out to be 15 years, 3 months and 22 days. There is no medical corroboration of the incident as the victim has refused her medical examination. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the victim is a consenting party as is but evident from her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S. She has travelled with the applicant to several places and has not raised any alarm whatsoever. Even she has stated that the applicant had dropped her near her uncle. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 05.11.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant, learned counsel for the High Court Legal Service Committee, learned State Law Officer have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that at the time of recovery, the victim was found pregnant by about four months and it is revealed that she gave birth to a dead baby, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the delay in institution of the FIR and the victim being a consenting party having gone with the applicant to several places coupled with the fact that there is no medical corroboration of the incident, 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. 10. Let the applicant- Sonu, 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 during trial. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 12. 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 :- 15.5.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad