Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:65987 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47224 of 2024 Applicant :- Ranvijay Alias Vijay Pratap Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. As informed by learned AGA, notice to the informant has been served on 04.01.2025 but none is present on behalf of the informant. 2. Heard Sri Arun Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ram Mohit Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 675 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(ड) of BNS and Sections 5(ड)/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Bansgaon, District - Gorakhpur, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have enticed away the minor niece of the informant, aged about 17 years, on 27.10.2024 at about 07:00 PM. 5. 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 two days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. It is further stated that the victim by her looks seems to be major although she is more than 17 years old as per high school certificate, as such, a leverage of two years may be granted to the applicant on upper side in light of law laid down by Supreme Court. 6. Learned counsel has also stated that the victim is the consenting party as is evident from her statement recorded u/s 183 BNSS whereby she has categorically stated that she had gone with the applicant to several places including Goa. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. 7. Learned counsel has further stated that there is another material contradictions in the case as the victim has retrieved by the police from Goa while as per the recovery memo, the place of recovery is Khajni, Gorakhpur. Both the places are 2000 km apart, as such, it is clear cut case of false implication. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 02.11.2024 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 AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history. 9. The age of the victim as per high school certificate is 17 years old, as such, she may be considered major in light of the judgement of Supreme Court passed in Sushil Kumar vs. Rakesh Kumar, (2003) 8 SCC 673, wherein it has been opined that it is more often in the Indian Society that person shows the age of their wards much below than their actual age. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, the contradictions in terms of recovery of the victim coupled by the fact that the victim seems to be a consenting party as she has travelled with the applicant to several places and also taking into consideration the settled law of the Supreme Court passed in Sushil Kumar (supra) regarding the age of the victim, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant- Ranvijay Alias Vijay Pratap Singh, 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 will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 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:- 28.4.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad