Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:48674 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7567 of 2025 Applicant :- Mohd.Islam Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Jay Kumar Soni Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. As per the instructions of the learned A.G.A., the complainant has been served with notice. However, none appears on behalf of the complainant. 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.0263 of 2025 under Section 137(2), 87, 64(2)(ड) BNS and Section 5(ठ)/6 POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act, Police Station Deva, District Barabanki. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that minor daughter of the informant, aged about 16 years, went away from home on 1.5.2025. It is also alleged that she has been enticed away by the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. It is contended that the victim was a consenting party and she on her own accord went away with the applicant. The statements under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS lack corroboration from the medico-legal examination of the victim. No injury was detected on the private parts of the victim. As per the ossification test, the age of the victim is 19 years, whereas according to her High School certificate, she is 17 years old. 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 to the statement of the victim under Section 180 and 183 BNSS; lack of corroborative material, the applicant has no criminal antecedents, he is in jail since 4.5.2025 so also the bone age of the victim prima facie it appears that she was a consenting party and without expressing any opinion on 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 Mohd. Islam 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 IPC (now Section 269 BNS). (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 of the IPC (now Section 209 BNS). Order Date :- 20.8.2025 Madhu D.R/P.S Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench