Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:45862 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7287 of 2025 Applicant :- Rahul Vishwakarma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- R.B.S. Rathaur,Anurag Singh Rathaur,Sachin Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State. None appears on behalf of the complainant, although, as per the instructions of learned AGA, notice to the complainant is served. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 16.03.2025 at around 6:00 p.m., the minor daughter of the informant went missing when she had gone out to relieve herself. It is further alleged that the applicant enticed her away on the false pretext of marriage. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents. It is contended that in her statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS, the victim did not make any allegation of rape against the applicant and instead admitted that she was in a romantic relationship with him. However, in her subsequent statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS, she improved upon her earlier statement and, for the first time, made allegations of rape. In her deposition before the Court, the victim stated that she had returned home along with the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant has fairly admitted that in her statements under Section 183 BNSS and before the Court, the victim alleged that the applicant had taken her nude photographs. It is further submitted that 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 AGA has opposed the bail application, on the ground that the victim is a minor. Perused the record. Upon perusal of the record, it appears that the victim voluntarily went with the applicant, stayed with him for four days, and travelled to various places without raising any alarm. In her testimony before the Court, she admitted to having left her home along with her class-X marksheet, which indicates her intention to leave voluntarily. In response to a query by the Court, learned AGA fairly submitted that neither any such photograph was recovered nor was the applicant’s mobile phone seized. No investigation has been conducted regarding these two articles. The charge sheet in the case has been filed. As per the radiological examination, the victim’s age is assessed to be 17 years. The medical examination report does not contain any corroborative evidence. On due consideration to the observation made herein above, the material improvements made by the victim in her statement under Section 183 BNSS and her testimony before the trial court as PW-1, the absence of criminal antecedents of the applicant, the fact that the victim willingly accompanied the applicant and returned with him without raising any alarm, and also carried her belongings at the time of leaving home, and in view of the fact that the victim has already been examined, there is no possibility of tampering the evidence, I find this to be a fit case for granting bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Rahul Vishwakarma involved in F.I.R. No. 42/2025, under Sections 137(2), 87, 351(2), 64(2)(m), 65(1) of B.N.S. and under Section 5(L)/6 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, Police Station- Nawabganj, District - Pratapgarh, 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 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS) 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 IPC (now Section 209 of BNS). It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial. Order Date :- 6.8.2025 R.C. Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench