Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:49095 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11238 of 2024 Applicant :- Roopchandra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Bharat Kumar Dixit,Ashish Kumar Maurya,Saurabh Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Rejoinder Affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. None appears for the complainant. The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.378 of 2024 under Section 65, 137(2), 87 BNS and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Mill Area, District Raebareli. In the FIR, it is alleged that on 29.06.2024 at about 1:00 p.m., the applicant enticed away the minor daughter of the informant, who is stated to be aged about 16 years. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the occurrence as per the FIR is alleged to have taken place on 29.06.2024, whereas the FIR was lodged on 05.08.2024, after an unexplained delay of more than one month. He further submits that, as per Annexure-2 to the bail application, the date of occurrence has been subsequently changed to 29.07.2024. It is contended that in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 BNSS, no allegation of rape has been made against the applicant. There is also no allegation that the applicant instigated or coerced her; rather, she went with the applicant of her own accord and resided with him. It is further contended that the victim has also refused to undergo internal and external medical examination. Her statement under Section 183 Cr.P.C. was recorded wherein she stated that she being annoyed with her father went away with the applicant. However, she subsequently alleged rape, but without mentioning any specific date or place of the incident. It is further submitted that after her statement under Section 183 Cr.P.C., she was medically examined. In the examination no external or internal injuries corroborating the allegation of rape were found. As per the radiological examination, the victim’s age is opined to be 17–18 years, while as per the school records, she is shown to be a minor. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that as per the school records the victim is a minor, being about 15 years of age. 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 charge-sheet has already been filed; the applicant is in custody since 09.08.2024; he has no criminal history; the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS do not find corroboration from medical or other evidence; and the radiological age of the victim has been assessed to be 17–18 years; lack of corroborative material in the prosecution case and without expressing any opinion on the merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Roopchandra 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). Order Date :- 21.8.2025 Madhu D.R/P.S Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench