Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:37264 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5817 of 2025 Applicant :- Narendra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Taufeeq Ahmad 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.210/2025 under Section 137(2), 87 BNS, Police Station Mohammadpur Khala, District Barabanki. In the prosecution case it is alleged that minor daughter of the informant aged about 15 years has been enticed away by the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim on her own accord went away with the applicant. In her statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNSS), she has not supported the prosecution version. It is further submitted that the medical evidence does not corroborate the prosecution story. A radiological examination was conducted to determine the age of the victim, and she was assessed to be 17 years of age. It is submitted that, as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jaya Mala v. Home Secretary, Government of Jammu & Kashmir & Others, (1982) 2 SCC 538, a margin of two years on either side can be given in age determination based on radiological examination. It is next submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is in jail since 07.05.2025. 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 statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNSS, the report of the radiological examination, the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, he is in judicial custody since 07.05.2025, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that it is a fit case for granting bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Narendra 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