Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:47011 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7498 of 2025 Applicant :- Ajeet Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Suhail Kashif Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. Despite service of notice, as informed by the learned AGA, none appears on behalf of the complainant. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 21.01.2024 at about 05:00 p.m., while the informant’s minor daughter, aged about 15 years, had gone to Behta Bazar, accused Sohail, with the assistance of other named accused persons, enticed her away. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is not named in the FIR. The named accused persons Ajij, Sohail, Asad and Faisal have exonerated while filing the charge sheet. The victim in her statement under Section 180 BNSS admitted that she of her own accord went away from her home and came to the applicant and both of them married. In her statement under Section 183 BNSS again stated that she of her own accord went away to the applicant and she married with him. No allegation against the applicant has been levelled by the victim. In that statement, she further submitted that she is of seven months pregnant; both of them married and they want to reside together. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is not named in the FIR and the named accused persons, Ajij, Sohail, Asad, and Faisal, have been exonerated while filing the charge sheet. The victim, in her statements under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, admitted that she had voluntarily left her home, went to the applicant, married him, and is now seven months pregnant. She made no allegations against the applicant and expressed her desire to reside with him. It is further submitted that the victim is illiterate and, as per radiological examination, her age is 15 years. It is also submitted that margin of error in ascertaining age by radiological examination is two years on either side as held by Supreme Court in Jaya Mala versus Home Secretary, Government of Jammu & Kashmir and others (1982)2 SCC 538 and the applicant being the accused is entitled for giving the benefit on higher side. 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 opposes the bail, contending that the victim is a minor and has been impregnated by the applicant. On due consideration to the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents; although the radiological examination indicates the victim’s age as 15 years, her statements under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS contain no allegations against the applicant and instead state that they are married and wish to live together, and further noting that the applicant is in custody since 13.06.2025, this Court finds it a fit case to grant bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Ajeet involved in Case Crime No.: 0027 of 2024, Under Section : 363,366,376 (3) I.P.C and 5(L)/6,5(J) (2)/6 P.O.C.S.O Act, Police Station Kursi, District Barabanki, 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 :- 12.8.2025 R.C. Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench