HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43057 of 2025 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1. Office vide its report dated 28.01.2026 has reported that notice issued to the first informant of the case has been served personally, inspite of service of notice, none appears for the informant even in the revised reading of the list. 2. Pursuant to the earlier order of this Court, ossification test report has been received by this Court. Perusal of the same would go to show that the victim is 17 years, which is kept on record. 3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Prinyanka Srivastava, learned counsel for the High Court Legal Services, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that according to the ossification test, the victim's age is 17 years, when in fact, she is a major. Learned counsel further argued that perusal of the statements of the victims would go to show that the victim is a consenting party and that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 14.10.2025. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Alok Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Priyanka Srivastava Neetu @ Dudu .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) activities and will misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of evidence, and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Hence the bail application is allowed. 7. Let applicant Neetu @ Dudu involved in Case Crime No.572 of 2025 under Sections 64, 351(3), 61(2) B.N.S., Section 3/4 of POSCO Act, Police Station Lohia Nagar, District Meerut, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:- i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court. iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission. v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 8. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant in accordance with law. March 19, 2026 S.Ali/Sahani BAIL No. 43057 of 2025 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad