HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11259 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and Sri Ram Kewal Tripathi, who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant. The Vakalatnama is taken on record. 2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.346 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 87, 61(2)(A), 70(2), 127(6) of BNS and Section 5G/6(1) of POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Balrampur. 3. In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that the daughter of the informant aged about 17 years was enticed by the co-accused Sabbir Ahmad on the false pretext of marriage. In the statement under Section 183 of BNSS, the victim stated that the co-accused Sabbir Ahmad used to work with the father of the victim and used to talk to her and had also given her a phone. It was also stated that he used to propose her for marriage. Subsequently, he had taken her on a four wheeler along with two co-accused and when they were roaming in the vehicle, they were apprehended by the police. In the statement under Section 183 of BNSS, huge allegations were levelled alleging that when she had gone along with her sister, all the accused came on a four wheeler and took her by the use of force and the co- accused Sabbir had formed physical relation with her. It was also stated that Sabbir was forcing her to marry. She also admitted that they were in the four wheeler and the police authority had apprehended them. As regards the applicant, it was alleged that the applicant was carrying a Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dinesh Kr. Chaudhary, Alok Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Kameshwar Yadav .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) torch of the phone and was laughing. It was also stated that the other two co-accused were holding the hands of the victim. The medical on record does not corroborate the allegation of any force being used. 4. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail prayer. 5. Considering the huge variance in the statements of the victim and there being no allegation of rape against the applicant, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 6. Let the applicant Kameshwar Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid first information report on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the 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 19, 2025 akverma BAIL No. 11259 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench