Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:47639 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7620 of 2025 Applicant :- Upendra Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Hoe Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. Learned A.G.A. on the basis of written instruction submits that notices to the complainant is served. None appears for the complainant. The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.161 of 2025, under Sections 64(1), 137(2), 87, 351(2) of BNS and Section 5(j)(2)/6 of POCSO Act, P.S. Kheri, District Lakhimpur Kheri. In the prosecution case it is alleged that minor daughter of the informant aged about 14 years has been enticed away by the applicant and it is further alleged that he has forcibly married with her on 03.03.2025. Learned counsel for applicant submits that victim in her statement under Sections 180 & 183 BNSS has denied the prosecution case. She on her own accord went away with the applicant and married with him. She wants to reside with the applicant. In the statement under Section 180 BNSS as well as 183 BNSS it is alleged by the victim that her mother is demanding money from the family of the accused and since it was not given, therefore, the F.I.R. has been lodged. In the medico legal examination thee are no sign of use of force or forceful penetrating injury. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 06.06.2025. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer. On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 06.06.2025 statement of the victim under Sections 180 & 183 BNSS, delay of more than one month in lodging of F.I.R. and there is no explanation for that applicant has no criminal history 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 Upendra Yadav be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court 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 Indian Panel Code (now Section 269 of 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 Indian Panel Code (now Section 209 BNS). Order Date :- 14.8.2025 Saurabh Yadav/- Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench