Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:46683 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7341 of 2025 Applicant :- Ankur Katiyar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Jaikaran Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 17.07.2024, the minor daughter of the informant, aged about 17 years, was enticed away by co-accused Akash Kumar Pal. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has not been named in the FIR. The victim, in her statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, has not supported the prosecution version. She of her own accord went away with the applicant and resided with him for approximately four months as husband and wife, without raising any alarm during the said period. The victim has unequivocally stated that no force was used by the applicant. She is a consenting party. No radiological examination was conducted. The applicant has explained the criminal history of one case in paragraph 17 of the bail application and is in custody since 15.03.2025. 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, at the time of the incident, was aged 17 years, two months, and 15 days. On due consideration to the statements of the victim under Section 180 and 183 BNSS; prima facie the victim appears to be a consenting party and there is a lack of corroborative evidence, coupled with the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 15.03.2025, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Ankur Katiyar involved in Case Crime No.238/2024, Under Section-87, 137(2), 64(1) of B.N.S. & Section 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station-Sareni, District- Raebareli, 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 :- 11.8.2025/R.C. Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench