HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9137 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Short counter Affidavit along with Vakalatnama filed by Shri Ankur Srivastava, Advocate on behalf of the complainant is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant as well as perused the record. The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.0130 of 2025 under Section 137(2), 87, 64(2)(m) BNS Act, 2023, Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, 2012, Police Station Jagatpur, District Raebareli. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the applicant enticed away the minor daughter of the informant and kept her in confinement. It is further alleged that while leaving, she took Rs.25,000/- in cash and jewellery along with her. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in her statement under Section 180 BNSS, the victim did not make any allegation against the applicant and clearly stated that she went with him to Kanpur of her own accord. Again, in her statement under Section 183 BNSS, she reiterated that she voluntarily accompanied the applicant, stayed with him in Kanpur for several days, and thereafter went to Mahoba. At no point of time did the victim raise any alarm. As per her own statement, she is a student of Class 12 and 17 years of age according to her Aadhaar card. There is also lack of corroborative material such as medico-legal examination of the victim. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vyas Narayan Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shivanshu Maurya .....Applicant(s) The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) It is further submitted that there is no likelihood of the applicant fleeing from justice or tampering with witnesses. In case he is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer but submits that as per the school records, the victim is 15 years of age. However, on a query made by this Court, it has not been denied that no ossification test of the victim has been conducted, nor has any reason been assigned by the Investigating Officer for not conducting the same. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that he has no objection if the applicant is enlarged on bail, as the FIR was lodged on account of pressure exerted by villagers. An affidavit to that effect has also been filed. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. On due consideration of the facts that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, the victim’s statements under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, lack of corroborative material, the applicant being in jail since 16.7.2025, the charge-sheet having been filed in the matter and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Shivanshu Maurya 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 BAIL No. 9137 of 2025 2 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 23, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S BAIL No. 9137 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench