Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:45355 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7138 of 2025 Applicant :- Vijay Kumar @ Mithun Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Yogesh Kumar Mishra,Shraddha Chaturvedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and Shri Dharmendra Kumar Yadav, Advocate who has filed vakalatnama along with counter affidavit on behalf of the complainant, which is taken on record. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 6.7.2024 at about 08.00 pm, the daughter of the informant aged about 16 years has been enticed away by the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim is major, as per her admission and statement under Section 180 BNSS. As per her statements under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, she along with the applicant went to Punjab of her own free will and lived together for several days. Both of them have married in the temple. He next submits that in the radiology report, the victim is stated to be 18 years old. She has refused to undergo medico legal examination. Thus, no case against the applicant is made out. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 2.4.2025. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant. On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record, the statements of the victim under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, radiology report so also the fact that the victim has refused to undergo medico legal examination; the applicant has no criminal history; he is languishing in jail since 2.4.2025 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- Vijay Kumar @ Mithun involved in Case Crime No. 210 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) of B.N.S. & Section 5L/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Jagdishpur, District- Amethi, 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (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 in accordance with law. (vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 B.N.S.S. 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 209 of B.N.S. Order Date :- 5.8.2025 Shravan Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench