HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8211 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Shri Manuvendra Singh, learned counsel for the complainant, who has filed Vakalatnama, which is taken on record as well as perused the record. The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.145 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 87, 64 BNS and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, 2012, Police Station Kunda, District Pratapgarh. In the FIR, it is alleged that the minor daughter of the informant, a student of Class 8, was enticed away by the applicant and the co-accused on 06.05.2025 on their motorcycle. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the FIR is nothing but a bundle of facts. It is pointed out that a complaint on the same allegations had earlier been lodged against the applicant and other co-accused persons with regard to having a relationship with the victim, relating to the same incident dated 22.04.2025. The said complaint was registered as FIR No. 0105 on 24.04.2025. The present FIR, however, has been registered on 05.06.2025 by way of improvement. It is further submitted that the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS suffer from improvements and even the complainant while giving statement under Section 180 BNSS has made improvements in the prosecution story. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajeet Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Akash Saroj .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) It is also argued that there is a lack of corroborative medical evidence in support of the prosecution case and as per the radiological examination the victim is found to be about 17–18 years old. The applicant has been falsely implicated. Moreover, the victim is a major, and from the earlier FIR, it is evident that she was a consenting party. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have 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 FIR No. 0105, the statements of the victim under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, the improvements made therein by the complainant as well as the victim in the prosecution case, the lack of corroborative medical evidence, and the fact that the applicant has no prior criminal history except the earlier FIR lodged by the same complainant 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 Akash Saroj 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 BAIL No. 8211 of 2025 2 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). September 1, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S BAIL No. 8211 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench