Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:53061 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3385 of 2024 Applicant :- Anil Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of Up And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Zafar Yab Khan,Shahroze Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vijay Prakash Chaturvedi Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Shahroze Khan, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Suwas Ram, Advocate holding brief of Sri Vijay Prakash Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Jai Kishan Chaurasia, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.202 of 2023, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Itwa, District Siddharth Nagar, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have enticed away the daughter of the informant, aged about seventeen and half years, on 08.10.2023 at about 3:00 p.m. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant was granted interim bail by this Court vide order dated 15.03.2024 and he has not misused the said opportunity granted earlier on. The FIR is delayed by about eight days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. Subsequent to it, the victim was recovered and her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded and she has stated that she was forcibly taken on motorcycle by two persons, namely, Vikram and Nawaj, and she sustained injuries on her knees due to fall from the said motorcycle and she was taken to a village, whereby both of them committed rape with her and had subsequently forcibly married her off with the applicant who is stated to have kept her in his house for three days and had committed rape with her and left her over at her house subsequently. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the main perpetrators of crimes are stated to be Vikram and Nawaj and they have been exonerated by the police. The applicant is stated to have married the victim, although she has expressed her unwillingness to stay with the applicant rather she has stated that she wanted to stay with her parents. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has also argued that as per ossification test report, the age of the victim is stated to be 19 years. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 17.10.2023 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application. 9. The Supreme Court in the case of Niranjan Singh and another vs. Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote and Others, AIR 1980 SC 785 has avoided detailed examination of the evidence and elaborate documentation of the merits of the case as no party should have the impression that his case has been prejudiced. A prima facie satisfaction of case is needed but it is not the same as an exhaustive exploration of the merits in the order itself. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the settled law of the Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690 and Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant- Anil Kumar, who is involved in aforementioned 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence. (ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. 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. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 13. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 10.4.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad