HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1894 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1.Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record. None appears for the complainant. 2.Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated. The victim has narrated an improbable story while giving statement under section 180 BNSS. Improvement has been made while giving statement under section 183 BNSS. In the ossification test, age of the victim has been assessed to be 14 years. The victim has been examined before the trial court where she has been declared hostile. The complainant has also been examined and he too has been declared hostile. Both have not supported the prosecution case. There is lack of corroborative evidence in the prosecution case. The applicant has no previous criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 20.12.2024. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. 4.Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail. He could not dispute the fact that P.W.1 and P.W.2 both have been examined and turned hostile, however, he submits that since the first information report has been registered under POCSO Act as also SC/ST Act both, therefore, the State Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Gulam Mustafa, Sudhir Kumar Rai Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Omkar Shukla @ Gopal .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) may be permitted to recover compensation, if any given to the victim in this case. 5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the fact that the applicant has no criminal history, P.W.1 and P.W.2 both have been examined and declared hostile as they have not supported the prosecution case, statements under sections 180 and 183 BNSS, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the period for which the applicant is in jail, age of the victim as per ossification test, judgment of Supreme Court in Jaya Mala versus Home Secretary, Govt. of Jammu & Kashmir and others (1982)2 SCC 538 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. 6.Let the applicant Omkar Shukla alias Gopal, involved in Case Crime No.949 of 2024 under sections 65(1), 115(2), 137(2), 351(3), 352 BNS, 3/4 POCSO Act, 3(2)V of SC/ST Act, P.S. Kotwali, district Unnao, 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) 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 officer or tamper with the evidence. (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A I.P.C. (now 269 BNS) BAIL No. 1894 of 2025 2 (vi) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A I.P.C. (now 209 BNS). 7.The application is allowed accordingly. Before parting, it is provided that it is open for the State to recover the compensation if any paid to the victim of occurrence considering the statements of the P.W.1 and P.W.2 who have been declared hostile. September 16, 2025 kkb/ BAIL No. 1894 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench