HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8906 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Notice to the complainant has been served as per the instructions of learned A.G.A, however no one has appeared 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.258 of 2025 under sections 64(1), 351(3) BNS and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act 2012, Police Station Motipur, District Bahraich. In the prosecution case it is alleged that on 07.05.2025 at about 12:00 noon, when the informant had gone to the jungle near her village to ease herself, the accused-applicant Saddam came there and started harassing her with malicious intent, and on her raising alarm Saddam assaulted her; meanwhile, Saddam’s brother, Mizjan, son of Murali, also arrived with a knife and threatened to kill the informant if she made any noise, after which both accused forcibly took her through the forest to Hasulia, put her on a bus and carried her towards Bichhiya, where the informant saw her uncle Mohammad Hussain and called out to him, upon which the accused persons, on seeing her uncle, immediately got down from the bus and fled, leaving the informant injured. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the First Information Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashish Raman Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Saddam .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Report was lodged after an unexplained delay of seven days. It is further submitted that the victim was a consenting party and she was recovered on the same day. The prosecution story as stated by the victim under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS is highly improbable. It is argued that the allegation of rape was introduced for the first time as an improvement in her statement under Section 180 BNSS, whereas initially only allegations of molestation and beating were made. It is improbable that anyone could take a girl at knife-point in a public bus to a distant place. The Investigating Officer, while preparing the site plan, has not shown the place where the alleged rape was committed; only the place of molestation and beating has been indicated. The victim, as per the school record, is more than 16 years of age, and no radiological age assessment has been conducted, which has been deliberately avoided by the prosecution. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant fleeing from justice or tampering with prosecution witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but has not been able to dispute the factual submissions advanced on behalf of the applicant. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. On due consideration of the facts that improvements have been made in the prosecution version, the alleged knife has not been recovered, the applicant has no criminal antecedents, the charge sheet has already been filed in this case, and the applicant is in custody since 28.05.2025, 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. BAIL No. 8906 of 2025 2 Let the applicant Saddam 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). September 17, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S BAIL No. 8906 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench