Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:37362 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5680 of 2025 Applicant :- Sumit Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ajeet Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.126 of 2025 under Section 137(2), 87 BNS and Section 16/17 of POCSO Act, Police station Sidhauli, District Sitapur. In the prosecution case it is alleged that minor daughter of the informant aged about 17 years has been enticed away by the applicant Sumit on 14.4.2025 while going away she has taken Rs.20,000/- cash as well as passbook, Aadhar card and jewellery. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim, in her statement recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS, has stated that she is 21 years old and a major. In her statements, she has stated that she went away with the applicant of her own free will and has not supported the prosecution case. It is further submitted that the victim refused to undergo medical examination, and her radiological age was not assessed by the Investigating Officer. However, merely on the basis of the date of birth recorded in her educational records as 17 years 10 months and 6 days the bail application of the applicant was rejected by the Sessions Court. The applicant is in jail since 03.05.2025. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the facts mentioned above. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record. On due consideration of the facts that the applicant is in jail since 03.05.2025, the charge-sheet has been filed in the matter, the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNSS, and the lack of corroborative medical evidence, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Sumit be released on bail in aforesaid first information report number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below concerned with the following conditions: (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 of the Indian Penal Code. (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. 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 of the Indian Penal Code. Order Date :- 2.7.2025 Madhu D.R/P.S Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench