Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:27028 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3984 of 2025 Applicant :- Ankur Prajapati Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Principal Secretary Deptt. Of Home Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Srivastava,Avinash Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Sri Avinash Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Abhishek Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the records. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 30 of 2025, under Sections 69, 352, 351(3) B.N.S. and Section 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered at Police Station Sangipur, District Pratapgarh. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 11.02.2025 alleging that the applicant developed relations with the informant's daughter aged about 18 years and under the allurement of marrying her he repetitively made physical relations with her and thereafter he declined to marry her. The informant's daughter had given an application to the police on 14.12.2024 but her report was not lodged. 4. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 BNSS as well as in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS she supported the F.I.R. version. However, although the victim stated in her statement under Section 183 BNSS that the applicant is threatening to spread her video virally, she also stated that she has not seen any such video with the applicant. 5. The medico legal examination report of the victim revealed no mark of injury or sign of use of force and the pathological examination of vaginal smear is negative for spermatozoa. The date of birth of victim has been mentioned to be 01.01.2007. 6. In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history. It has further been stated in the affidavit that on 14.12.2024 a settlement was entered into between the victim, informant and the applicant's father (the deponent of the affidavit filed in support of bail application) wherein it is recorded that negotiations for marriage of the applicant with the victim was going on which could not culminated in their marriage. The applicant's father had agreed to pay Rs.2.5 lacs to the informant and the victim within one month of the agreement towards acceptance of marriage and thereafter both the persons will be free to marry any other person. It is also recorded in the compromise that in case the applicant's father failed to comply with this obligation the informant and the victim will take recourse to the process of law. 7. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant's father failed to pay the amount of Rs.2.5 lacs to the informant and the victim and it is a case of breach of agreement only. 8. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the prayer for bail and he has submitted that the allegations have been established during investigation and a charge sheet has been submitted on 23.03.2025 against the applicant for the offences under Sections 69, 352, 351(3) B.N.S. and Section 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 9. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the date of birth of the victim is said to be 01.01.2007 and on the date of the agreement i.e. 14.12.2024 she was not of marriageable age yet the applicant was blamed for resiling from his promise to marry the victim; that the victim and the informant both had agreed to settle the dispute in case the applicant's father has paid Rs.2.5 lacs and the F.I.R. has been lodged only when the applicant's father failed to pay money in terms of the agreement dated 14.12.2024; that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 17.03.2025 and the investigation already stands concluded and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime. 10. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed. 11. Let the applicant- Ankur Prajapati be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court. (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) Order Date :- 8.5.2025 Ram. Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench