HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7439 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State, Shri Riyaz Ahmad, learned counsel for the informant and perused the record. 2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No. 98 of 2025, under sections 64(1), 351(2), 64(2) BNS, Sections 5/6 POCSO Act, P.S. Gudamba, District Lucknow. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant argues that in terms of FIR it was alleged that daughter of informant was admitted to a hospital and was discharged on 15.10.2024. it was stated that subsequently brother of informant was also admitted with respect to knee surgery and on 13.3.2025 when daughter of informant became unwell it was revealed that she became pregnant carrying fetus of 20 weeks and thereafter she informed that the applicant committed wrong on her. In the statement under Section 183 BNSS the victim stated that during admission of uncle of victim for operation the applicant took her to study room and physical relations were formed because of which she became pregnant. In the light of the said allegations learned counsel for the applicant submits that tentative age of victim is around 17 years as per statement in the FIR and she was 16 and half years old at the time of alleged incident. It is further argued that there is substantial delay in lodging the FIR which is Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajeev Kumar Mishra Rudra, Abdul Malik, Amar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Hemant Kumar Pandey, Osama Syed, Riyaz Ahmad Rehan @ Mohd. Rehan .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Sectt. Home Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) unexplained and the statement which reveal that she was taken to study room and wrong was committed on her prima facie indicates consent. The DNA report on record does not match for corroborating the allegations. It is informed that fetus was aborted under the direction and order of Chief Judicial Magistrate. There is no report to corroborate the paternity of the applicant with the fetus. As regards criminal history learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant was never summoned in any of the cases referred to by learned A.G.A. in the counter affidavit and has no relation with the said cases. 4. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application. 5. Considering the fact that relationship allegedly started in the month of October 2024 and the fact that the DNA does not corroborate the allegations, however, without commenting upon the merits of the case, the applicant who is in jail since 18.3.2025 is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed. 6. Let the applicant Rehan @ Mohd. Rehan be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions: (a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings; (b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and (c) 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. November 27, 2025 J. K. Dinkar BAIL No. 7439 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- JESHU KUMAR DINKAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench