Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:13389 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1994 of 2025 Applicant :- Srikant Nishad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Jyoti Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Sri Surjeet Kumar Mishra, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of informant/complainant, same is taken on record. 2. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is also taken on record. 3. Heard Ms. Jyoti Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Sudha Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Surjeet Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for complainant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that earlier one anticipatory bail application No.2351 of 2024 (Shrikant Nishad @ Shrikant vs. State of U.P.) was filed before this Court and during pendency of that anticipatory bail, the present applicant was arrested on 24.01.2025 in Case Crime No.179/2024, under Sections 376, 323, 504 & 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Katka, District- Ambedkar Nagar, since then he is in jail. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the present applicant has attained the marriageable age and got married with the prosecutrix, when she attained the marriageable age. The marriage agreement dated 03.01.2025 has been enclosed as Annexure-5, and as per mark-sheet of the prosecutrix, she attained the marriageable age on 01.01.2025. Today, the informant- mother of the prosecutrix namely Sangyati and father of the applicant namely Ram Pakal are present in the Court. Both have stated that the applicant and prosecutrix have got married and that marriage took place in the temple wherein the closed family members of both the sides were present. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the prosecutrix has not levelled any allegation against the present applicant. The present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. Chargesheet has been filed. As, both have got married therefore, the present applicant may be enlarged on bail. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has undertaken that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court and there is no apprehension of absconding and he shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate with the investigation/ trial proceedings properly. 6. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the aforesaid prayer for bail of the present applicant by submitting that the chargesheet has been filed therefore trial would be commenced, wherein, the applicant will have to participate. Learned counsel for the informant has not opposed the bail application and has submitted that since both the applicant and prosecutrix have got married, therefore, he has nothing to say. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that the present applicant has attained the marriageable age and got married with the prosecutrix, when she attained the marriageable age; the marriage agreement dated 03.01.2025 has been enclosed as Annexure-5, and as per mark-sheet of the prosecutrix, she attained the marriageable age on 01.01.2025; the informant- mother of the prosecutrix namely Sangyati and father of the applicant namely Ram Pakal are present in the Court and both have stated that the applicant and prosecutrix have got married and that marriage took place in the temple wherein the closed family members of both the sides were present and considering his undertaking that he shall cooperate with the investigation / trial proceedings and shall abide all terms and conditions of bail order, without entering into merits of the issue, I am of the opinion that the present applicant may be released on bail. 8. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant (Srikant Nishad), involved in aforesaid 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) 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. (ii) 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 of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) 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.may be issued and if 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 of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. 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. (v) The applicant shall not leave the country without permission of the Court concerned. Order Date :- 5.3.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench