Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:123198 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6363 of 2025 Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Mani Pandey,Rafeek Ahmad Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Chandra Mani Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ajay Singh, learned A.G.A-1, appearing for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 100 of 2024, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Section 4(2) of POCSO Act, Police Station Iglas, District Aligarh, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, an FIR was instituted by the informant stating that the applicant, who happens to be the contractor, has enticed away his two minor daughters on 6.3.2024 at about 7 p.m when they had gone themselves to ease out. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by about five hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has further stated that two victims have been examined as V1 and V2. V1 has categorically stated that she was taken away by the applicant but has stated that she was raped by co-accused Shailendra, while V2 has stated that it was the applicant who had raped her. Learned counsel has further argued that co-accused Shailendra has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 27.05.2025, as such the applicant is entitled for bail. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has next stated that the victims are the consenting party as is but evident as it is not possible for a single person to forcibly abduct two girls at a go. The victim V2 has mentioned her age to be 16 years, although by her physical appearance, she seems to be major, as such the applicant is entitled for bail. 8. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 26.7.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 9. Per contra, learned AGA-1 has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the applicant is the main accused person as it was he, who has abducted two minor daughters of the informant, as such he is not entitled for bail. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the delay in institution of the FIR coupled by the fact that two victims had gone with the applicant in the car, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant- Rajesh Kumar, who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 13. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 25.7.2025 Sumit S (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad