HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8188 of 2025 Court No. - 12 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. The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.11 of 2025 under Section 376, 344, 506 Indian Penal Code and Section 5L/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Balrampur. In the prosecution case it is alleged that via application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. it is alleged in the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. that on 01.01.2023 at about 6:00 p.m., the daughter of the informant went missing. She returned on 19.06.2024 at around 8:30 p.m. and informed the complainant that on 01.01.2023 at about 6:00 p.m., while she had gone to ease herself, the applicant along with another unknown person, kidnapped her. They gagged her mouth, made her sit on a motorcycle, confined her in a room, and raped her one by one. On 19.06.2024 at about 4:00 a.m., she found an opportunity and managed to escape. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the story narrated by the victim is highly improbable. It is alleged that the applicant kept the victim in confinement for a period of one and a half years. The prosecution story, as well as the statements of the victim under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, also appear to be improbable, particularly in view of the fact that the applicant was remanded in Crime No. 0034 of 2023 under Sections 364, 302, 201/34 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Vijay Kumar Yadav .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) IPC on 17.05.2023 and was subsequently granted bail by this Court vide order dated 25.08.2023. Therefore, for a period of three months, the applicant was in jail, which contradicts the prosecution’s narrative. Ultimately, when examined before the learned trial court, the victim did not support the prosecution case and was declared hostile. The learned counsel contends that the victim falsely implicated the applicant because the applicant had proposed marriage to her, which was denied, and hence he was implicated. The applicant is innocent. No radiological test of the victim has been conducted to ascertain her bone age. There is a lack of corroborative evidence, such as medical evidence, to support the prosecution case. Although, as per school records, the victim is alleged to be a minor aged about 13 years and 2 months, in her statements under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, she stated her age to be 18 years. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record. On due consideration of the facts that the victim has been declared hostile before the learned trial court, as well as the fact that the applicant was in jail since 17.05.2023 to 25.8.2023 the period during which the victim is alleged to have been gang-raped, coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal history, and that he has been in jail since 21.04.2025, and without expressing any opinion on the 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 Vijay Kumar Yadav 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. BAIL No. 8188 of 2025 2 (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). August 29, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S BAIL No. 8188 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench