HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10739 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. None appears for the complainant, although notice to the complainant has already been served. 2. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the daughter of the informant aged about 20 years has been enticed away by the named accused person Pinku, on 12.08.2025, at about 4 A.M in the morning. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S, she has stated that she is 20 years old, and she has not taken the name of the applicant. As per the radiological examination, the age of the victim is assessed as 20 years. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S, the victim has made improvement and she stated that she is 16 years old, but she has not levelled any allegation against the applicant and she has stated that the applicant did not do any wrong with her, however, she stated that the she went to Lucknow alongwith the applicant by bus. 4. He further submits that the medical report also does not support the prosecution case as no evidence has been found against the applicant. The victim has made a statement before the doctor who conducted her medical examination that she came to Lucknow alongwith the applicant and both resided together for four days. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the victim is major and a consenting party and no corroborative evidence in support of the prosecution case has been found. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is languishing in jail since 03.07.2025. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arun Kumar Saxena Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shyam Bihari .....Applicant(s) The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) liberty of bail. 6. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the statements of the victim recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S and 183 B.N.S.S, the fact that there is lack of corroborative evidence against the applicant, the fact that the medical report of the victim does not support the prosecution case, the fact that as per the radiological examination, the victim is 20 years old and is major; as also the period for which the applicant is in jail i.e. since 03.07.2025; as also the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal history 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. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant Shyam Bihari, involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 278 of 2025, Under Sections- 87, 137(2) B.N.S. and Section 16/17 POCSO Act, Police Station- Rampur Mathura District- Sitapur, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (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 in accordance with law. (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 BAIL No. 10739 of 2025 2 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 IPC (now Section 209 of BNS). 9. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial. November 7, 2025 DiVYa BAIL No. 10739 of 2025 3 Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench