Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:40617 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1251 of 2025 Appellant :- Mohammad Suyeb Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Rakesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. 1. Counter affidavit filed today by learned A.G.A. is taken on record. 2. Case called out. The respondent No.2/complainant chose not to appear before this Court to oppose the instant appeal despite service of notice, as appears from Annexure No.CA-1 to the counter affidavit of State and according to the office report dated 21.05.2025 as also the order of this Court dated 24.04.2025. Learned A.G.A. is present in the Court. In these circumstances, this Court proceeded to hear the instant appeal, which relates to enlargement of appellant on bail, on merits. 3. Heard counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 4. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 (in short 'SC/ST Act') against the impugned order dated 11.03.2025 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Sitapur in Bail Application No.71 of 2025, arising out of FIR/Case Crime No.337 of 2024, under Sections- 87, 137(2) B.N.S. and Sections- 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Atariya, District- Sitapur. 5. While pressing the present appeal, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that according to FIR/Case Crime No.337 of 2024 dated 26.12.2024 lodged at Police Station- Atariya, under Sections 137(2) and 87 B.N.S. the appellant -Mohd. Suyeb, aged about 19 years, with the help of co-accused Nafeeq enticed away the minor grand daughter, aged about 15 years, of informant. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant further stated that the allegations levelled in the FIR are completely incorrect, as the same could be deduced from the statement(s) of victim herself recorded in terms of Sections 180 & 183 B.N.S.S. 7. Based upon aforesaid statements of victim, it is further stated that the victim was having affair with the appellant and she, on her own volition, accompanied the appellant to Haiderabad. The appellant was not in dominant position being aged about 19 years. It is further stated that from a bare perusal of statements of the victim recorded in terms of Section 180 and 183 B.N.S.S. it is apparent that no physical relation was established between appellant and victim. 8. Further submission is that the victim denied for medical examination and the age of the victim, i.e. about 15 years at the relevant point of time is the subject matter of trial and could be considered by the trial court based upon the evidence adduced before it in this regard and at this stage of bail, the benefit of various pronouncements/judgments related to determination of age including the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case(s) of Birad Mal Singhvi Vs. Anand Purohit, reported in (1988) Supp SCC 604, State of Punjab Vs. Gurmit Singh, reported in (1996) 2 SCC 384, Suhani Vs. State of U.P. delivered on 26.04.2018 in Civil Appeal No.4532 of 2018 arising out of SLP(C) No.8001 of 2018 and in the case of Manak Chand alias Mani Vs. State of Haryana reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1397, shall be extended in favour of the appellant. 9. It is further submitted that appellant, having no criminal history, is languishing in jail since 31.12.2024. In these circumstances, the present appeal is liable to be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside and the appellant be enlarged on bail. 10. Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail, however, he could not dispute the aforesaid contentions of counsel for the appellant. 11. Considered the submissions advanced by the counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and all the relevant documents placed on record. 12. Upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A., F.I.R., impugned order, as also the statement(s) of the victim and also the observations made by Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgments, referred above, including that the appellant is in jail since 31.12.2024 and chances of conviction of the appellant in the instant case, this Court finds that the present appeal is liable to be allowed. Accordingly, it is allowed. 13. Order 11.03.2025 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Sitapur in Bail Application No.71 of 2025, arising out of FIR/Case Crime No.337 of 2024, under Sections- 87, 137(2) B.N.S. and Sections- 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Atariya, District- Sitapur is hereby set aside. 14. Let the appellant- Mohammad Suyeb be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :- (i) The appellant shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s). (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence. (v) The appellant 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. (vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. 15. In case of default of above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law 16. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observation(s) made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation(s) made in this order. Order Date :- 16.7.2025 Anand/- Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench